Fiddle's Green

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by Abbott Shaull

You forgetting the minor invasion of Gernada (sp) and Panama where at each the 2/3 of the 82nd Division made it. Of course the two Brigade Commands were mixed with 2 of the regularly schedule Battalions and the Brigade that HQ that sat home sent two of three battalions to the first action. Lessons were learned and during Panama none of that foolishness was entertained.

Please! I'm still trying to forget Grenada!!!! There is nothing like trying to plan a military operation from a tourist guide book map of the island!

"And I want 3rd platoon to hook through Henry's Bar & Grill and then advance on the Hilton, watch out for that miniature golf course on your left, S2 thinks that the Cubans have set up around the windmill!"

[Abbott Shaull]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

Please! I'm still trying to forget Grenada!!!! There is nothing like trying to plan a military operation from a tourist guide book map of the island!

"And I want 3rd platoon to hook through Henry's Bar & Grill and then advance on the Hilton, watch out for that miniature golf course on your left, S2 thinks that the Cubans have set up around the windmill!"

Yeah I know, it was entirely a cluster from what I heard of the troops and NCOs who had the misfortune of being on that operation. Again it was one of those operation where it was better left to Marine Expeditionary Unit or the logical argument could of seen a MEB being used.

Sending 2/3 of the the 82nd with a unhealthy mix of Special Forces, Rangers and SEAL was a grand recipe of more deaths and wounded than their needed to be... Oh well.

Panama was just as bad. Everyone wanted piece of the action. As a result again more people lost their lives than if they kept the entire thing KISS. Especially since literally we had forces in place. It was the movement of troops Bragg that finally gave up that the operation was underway since they were looking at the same flight information as we were...*shrug*...

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by Abbott Shaull

Yeah I know, it was entirely a cluster from what I heard of the troops and NCOs who had the misfortune of being on that operation. Again it was one of those operation where it was better left to Marine Expeditionary Unit or the logical argument could of seen a MEB being used.

Sending 2/3 of the the 82nd with a unhealthy mix of Special Forces, Rangers and SEAL was a grand recipe of more deaths and wounded than their needed to be... Oh well.

Panama was just as bad. Everyone wanted piece of the action. As a result again more people lost their lives than if they kept the entire thing KISS. Especially since literally we had forces in place. It was the movement of troops Bragg that finally gave up that the operation was underway since they were looking at the same flight information as we were...*shrug*...

Sometimes this Joint Service stuff is a real pain in the a**!! The only good to come out was the creation of the Joint Special Operations Command...an act which has reduced numerous general and flag officers into foaming fits!!! IMAGINE, giving Rangers, SEALs and Green Berets equal fooring with the traditional branches!!!!

ROFLMA!

[Abbott Shaull]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

Sometimes this Joint Service stuff is a real pain in the a**!! The only good to come out was the creation of the Joint Special Operations Command...an act which has reduced numerous general and flag officers into foaming fits!!! IMAGINE, giving Rangers, SEALs and Green Berets equal fooring with the traditional branches!!!!

ROFLMA!

Yeah well the sad thing is that most of the members who were the one who could best explain their capabilities rarely rose high enough with-in their separate commands. Granted there were people in all of the branches Special Operation Commands before they joined by the Joint Special Operations Command that would sneak under the radar to become Brigadier General, Major General, or Rear Admiral. Yet, these promotions were rare and far to find. Also there were senior officers who look upon Special Operation troops as if they are provide nothing to of value to their forces.

Granted by this time I know in the Army Special Operation Command top job was Lt General. Outside of the the individual Services Special Operation Commands there were few jobs outside of these Commands for people to get promotions. In general if they did make it to Flag rank they were placed back in staff positions or in other none relate Special Operations type Commands. For most of the time they would make back to their respective Special Operation Commands or staff position for planning at the Pentagon or the various other Joint Commands.

On serious note it more like elevation of Marine Corps Commandant to a Full voting member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. When the Marine Corps is suppose to be branch of the Navy.

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by Abbott Shaull

Yeah well the sad thing is that most of the members who were the one who could best explain their capabilities rarely rose high enough with-in their separate commands. Granted there were people in all of the branches Special Operation Commands before they joined by the Joint Special Operations Command that would sneak under the radar to become Brigadier General, Major General, or Rear Admiral. Yet, these promotions were rare and far to find. Also there were senior officers who look upon Special Operation troops as if they are provide nothing to of value to their forces.

Granted by this time I know in the Army Special Operation Command top job was Lt General. Outside of the the individual Services Special Operation Commands there were few jobs outside of these Commands for people to get promotions. In general if they did make it to Flag rank they were placed back in staff positions or in other none relate Special Operations type Commands. For most of the time they would make back to their respective Special Operation Commands or staff position for planning at the Pentagon or the various other Joint Commands.

On serious note it more like elevation of Marine Corps Commandant to a Full voting member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. When the Marine Corps is suppose to be branch of the Navy.

Ah the Green Machine! The day it ever makes sense is the day I will fall over from sheer heart failure!

[dragoon500ly]

Mulling over things, in between coffee breaks, I got to thinking about the light tank. Now in the US Army, we like our tanks to be big and heavy and equipped with large caliber guns and all kinds of electronic doo-dads. But I keep coming back to the light tank. It offers all kinds of advantages when you sit down and think about it. To be sure, it doesn't have heavy armor, but it can be more strategically portable than a M-1. Prior to the intro of the 120mm smoothbore, the US was developing a series of improved 105mm shells that were as capable as the 120mm, and in at least two cases, bloody well out performed the 120mm!

Now a bit of background...the first "official" light tank other than the WWI French FT would be the M-3 Stuart, now before anyone bursts a bubble, the M-2 series of combat cars were never considered to be light tanks, simply because they were the only tanks that we had in the pre-World War II era. The Stuart is the best example of a light tank, well armored for its weight, a lovely horsepower to weight ratio and for its period, adequate armament. Too bad that it was thrown into combat against vehicles that were a generation ahead of its design. Its 37mm main armament quickly proved to be lacking in fire power.

The M-3 Stuart was replaced with the M-5 Stuart; this improvement used a newly designed hull to delete some of the numerous shot traps of the M-3s design, but kept pretty much the same turret and armament. The designers of the M-5 ignored reports coming back from the front about how inadequate the 37mm cannon had become. This was the developmental end of the Stuart.

Next out of factory was the first true advance, the M-24 Chaffee light tank. For its weight, it was adequately armored, horsepower-to-weight ratio was not as high as it could have been, but the main gun was now the 75mm cannon (it was the same cannon mounted in the B-25J medium bomber). The problem with the armament was that by the introduction of the M-24 (1945), the 75mm had pretty much lived out its developmental lifespan. The Korean War proved to be the undoing of the M-24, although I believe that this was due more to the tank being thrown up against the T-34/85 tank than any design flaw. Norway upgunned its M-24s with a 90mm and by all reports are still quite happy with the design.

The next and last US light tank was the M-41 Walker Bulldog. Lightly armored for its weight, it had excellent horsepower-to-weight and was armed with the 76mm cannon. The Bulldog didn't last long in US service as the decision was being made to go with the Main Battle Tank concept. The Bulldog served in several armies, but its moment of fame came in the Vietnam War where it equipped several companies of the ARVN. It proved to be a reliable, nimble design and several PT-76s and T-54/55s of the PAVN were destroyed prior to the fall of South Vietnam.

A few years ago, a design for a light tank was pushed. Called the M-8 Buford Mobile Gun System, it was an intresting concept. It was air-portable. Its armor could be beefed up by adding additional armor panels to met three basic threat levels. It had an excellent horsepower-to-weight ratio and was equipped with the 105mm rifled cannon. The initial tests of the M-8 showed it to be a capable design, but alas! It fell prey to the next round of budget cutbacks. Something about a Congressman needing a bridge in Alaska.

GDW also pushed something they called the LAV-75, didn't exist, even as a design concept, but its armament was in development. The 75mm gun was coupled to an autoloader that allowed the weapon to fire 10 rounds in the time it took you to read this sentence. Impressive, no? The drawback to the 75mm gun was the same one that doomed the older 75mm in WWII, armor penetration was for shit. What good did it do to hit a T-62 ten times if none of the rounds penetrated? That was pretty much the end of the 75mm gun concept.

A light tank in the US Army...nowdays we have a Stryker with a 105mm gun that the service is trying to fix (recoil is such a b***h!). A light tank battalion could be attached to the airborne/air assault/light infantry divisions and give them some badly needed firepower. The divisional cavalry squadrons could also use a light tank design. Just some random musings!

[Adm.Lee]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

GDW also pushed something they called the LAV-75, didn't exist, even as a design concept, but its armament was in development. The 75mm gun was coupled to an autoloader that allowed the weapon to fire 10 rounds in the time it took you to read this sentence. Impressive, no? The drawback to the 75mm gun was the same one that doomed the older 75mm in WWII, armor penetration was for shit. What good did it do to hit a T-62 ten times if none of the rounds penetrated? That was pretty much the end of the 75mm gun concept.

Are you sure it's the same 75mm? I figured it was the same 75mm statted from the Scorpion and/or AMX. The Sherman's 75mm was a low-velocity thing, designed by an artillery-experienced ordnance team. According to "Steel coffins", they wanted a barrel that could last 2,000 shots before wearing out, but experience showed that tanks didn't last that long.

[James Langham]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

Mulling over things, in between coffee breaks, I got to thinking about the light tank. Now in the US Army, we like our tanks to be big and heavy and equipped with large caliber guns and all kinds of electronic doo-dads. But I keep coming back to the light tank. It offers all kinds of advantages when you sit down and think about it. To be sure, it doesn't have heavy armor, but it can be more strategically portable than a M-1. Prior to the intro of the 120mm smoothbore, the US was developing a series of improved 105mm shells that were as capable as the 120mm, and in at least two cases, bloody well out performed the 120mm!

Now a bit of background...the first "official" light tank other than the WWI French FT would be the M-3 Stuart, now before anyone bursts a bubble, the M-2 series of combat cars were never considered to be light tanks, simply because they were the only tanks that we had in the pre-World War II era. The Stuart is the best example of a light tank, well armored for its weight, a lovely horsepower to weight ratio and for its period, adequate armament. Too bad that it was thrown into combat against vehicles that were a generation ahead of its design. Its 37mm main armament quickly proved to be lacking in fire power.

The M-3 Stuart was replaced with the M-5 Stuart; this improvement used a newly designed hull to delete some of the numerous shot traps of the M-3s design, but kept pretty much the same turret and armament. The designers of the M-5 ignored reports coming back from the front about how inadequate the 37mm cannon had become. This was the developmental end of the Stuart.

Next out of factory was the first true advance, the M-24 Chaffee light tank. For its weight, it was adequately armored, horsepower-to-weight ratio was not as high as it could have been, but the main gun was now the 75mm cannon (it was the same cannon mounted in the B-25J medium bomber). The problem with the armament was that by the introduction of the M-24 (1945), the 75mm had pretty much lived out its developmental lifespan. The Korean War proved to be the undoing of the M-24, although I believe that this was due more to the tank being thrown up against the T-34/85 tank than any design flaw. Norway upgunned its M-24s with a 90mm and by all reports are still quite happy with the design.

The next and last US light tank was the M-41 Walker Bulldog. Lightly armored for its weight, it had excellent horsepower-to-weight and was armed with the 76mm cannon. The Bulldog didn't last long in US service as the decision was being made to go with the Main Battle Tank concept. The Bulldog served in several armies, but its moment of fame came in the Vietnam War where it equipped several companies of the ARVN. It proved to be a reliable, nimble design and several PT-76s and T-54/55s of the PAVN were destroyed prior to the fall of South Vietnam.

A few years ago, a design for a light tank was pushed. Called the M-8 Buford Mobile Gun System, it was an intresting concept. It was air-portable. Its armor could be beefed up by adding additional armor panels to met three basic threat levels. It had an excellent horsepower-to-weight ratio and was equipped with the 105mm rifled cannon. The initial tests of the M-8 showed it to be a capable design, but alas! It fell prey to the next round of budget cutbacks. Something about a Congressman needing a bridge in Alaska.

GDW also pushed something they called the LAV-75, didn't exist, even as a design concept, but its armament was in development. The 75mm gun was coupled to an autoloader that allowed the weapon to fire 10 rounds in the time it took you to read this sentence. Impressive, no? The drawback to the 75mm gun was the same one that doomed the older 75mm in WWII, armor penetration was for shit. What good did it do to hit a T-62 ten times if none of the rounds penetrated? That was pretty much the end of the 75mm gun concept.

A light tank in the US Army...nowdays we have a Stryker with a 105mm gun that the service is trying to fix (recoil is such a b***h!). A light tank battalion could be attached to the airborne/air assault/light infantry divisions and give them some badly needed firepower. The divisional cavalry squadrons could also use a light tank design. Just some random musings!

The LAV75 did actually exist - it was known as the Ares Light Tank.

I am actually working on this and I've put my draft thoughts on. Sorry it's not as polished as usual.

[Adm.Lee]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

Please! I'm still trying to forget Grenada!!!! There is nothing like trying to plan a military operation from a tourist guide book map of the island!

It was a little better than that. One of the staffies somewhere had actually visited, and written his Staff College paper on how to invade it. I agree, though, the execution was sub-par.