RPG Forums

Go Back   RPG Forums > Role Playing Game Section > Twilight 2000 Forum
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-13-2019, 03:19 AM
StainlessSteelCynic's Avatar
StainlessSteelCynic StainlessSteelCynic is offline
Registered Registrant
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 2,375
Default

CDAT you might not have "hard data" to back up your thoughts on the Bradley but you have spent a number of years "in the industry" so to speak, i.e. enough time in the army to see what's workable and what's not so useful.
I'm like the rest of you in that the trend to stick ATGWs on IFVs struck me as trying to make one vehicle do all things.
And you know what they say, "that dog won't hunt"...
You either make it a battle taxi, a light fighting vehicle or an AT vehicle. You ain't gonna get a good vehicle by forcing all the comprises necessary onto the design or it's operational doctrine by trying to make one vehicle do all three things.

I have no particular issue with IFVs, a battle taxi with some firepower to discourage the predators and/or fire in support of the infantry. But yeah, when you let the crew start thinking they can take on tanks...
To my way of thinking, putting TOWs on the Bradley went against the tried & true combined arms doctrine - everything supports everything else, we've seen plenty of examples of armour in the Middle East or Chechnya taken out by infantry because the crew decided to go it alone.
You don't need someone in a battle taxi taking on tanks when you already have ATGW teams, ATGW vehicles, arty, CAS and oh yeah, your own tanks, to do that for you.

But back to the original topic, while I always had a strong preference for the Marder over the Bradley or Warrior, it's still sad to see the Bradley at the end of its life (I felt the same way seeing all those Marders sent to the scrap yard). I'm also one of the crowd who loves that front cover image from Challenge #35 because it represented Twilight so well - the mix of nationalities, the scavenging for food, the Bradley looking like it needs some more attention to maintenance, the extra storage racks added to the sideskirts and what looks suspiciously like an esky/cooler on the rear hull.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-13-2019, 09:47 AM
rcaf_777's Avatar
rcaf_777 rcaf_777 is offline
Staff Headquarter Weinie
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Petawawa Ontario Canada
Posts: 1,104
Default

About time it's getting a little long in the tooth even with the upgrade models

what about its variants like M270 Multiple Launch Rocket System, the M4 C2V battlefield command post, and the M6 Bradley Linebacker air defense vehicle?
__________________
I will not hide. I will not be deterred nor will I be intimidated from my performing my duty, I am a Canadian Soldier.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-13-2019, 12:19 PM
copeab's Avatar
copeab copeab is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 679
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic View Post
I'm like the rest of you in that the trend to stick ATGWs on IFVs struck me as trying to make one vehicle do all things.
Putting ATGM launchers on the outside turret of some AMX-13's made a bit of sense, but not Bradleys.

Quote:
I have no particular issue with IFVs, a battle taxi with some firepower to discourage the predators and/or fire in support of the infantry. But yeah, when you let the crew start thinking they can take on tanks...
The best range for a TOW is considerably farther away from the battleline than the range of the Bradley's other weapons, or the distance at which you'd want the troops to dismount and move forward on foot.

Quote:
But back to the original topic, while I always had a strong preference for the Marder over the Bradley or Warrior,
I agree with you on the Marder, although I would prefer an automatic grenade launcher over an autocannon. You do lose ammo capacity, but it is much more effective vs infantry and useful vs light vehicles.
__________________
A generous and sadistic GM,
Brandon Cope

http://copeab.tripod.com

Last edited by copeab; 02-13-2019 at 12:55 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:23 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.