The Technical - Page 3




 
--
 
November 12th, 2011  
CH3TN!K
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by wayword son
But the us did think of stealth, and deception, and this vehicle is faster, quieter, more maneuverable, and has superior cross country performance, than any traditional technical.


Iím not sure, but I think there is also a javelin missile next to the gunner, so ambushing tanks is a possibility, (Iím sure you could also stuff a stinger on board. as well)

in truth, the US military would have no use for a civilian pickup, with a heavy gun. because we have this vehicle, optimized for raiding. and the m-rap. m-atv, and the armored hummer for patrolling, and convoy protection.

(IMHO), the technical is an obvious solution in bush wars (all a warlord needs is a heavy machine or AA gun, and access to a Toyota dealership) but a primarily technical armed force would not be a serious threat against even a moderately armored and armed opponent.
I do not know if you realized that the US Military has been trying to get rid of these Chenworth DPV's for the past 15 years. Since they too see that there is absolutely no need to be running around in no armor, and close to nothing armament. However I have to mention that the US is currently trying to push for a DPV replacement that will top between 85mph and 100mph. But every vehicle entered has been rejected so far. The only people who really need stupid **** like this is para-military units and PMC's, who will be doing more patrolling than fighting. Blackwater or Xe, whatever you want to call them, is actually producing one.
November 17th, 2011  
wayword son
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CH3TN!K
I do not know if you realized that the US Military has been trying to get rid of these Chenworth DPV's for the past 15 years. Since they too see that there is absolutely no need to be running around in no armor, and close to nothing armament. However I have to mention that the US is currently trying to push for a DPV replacement that will top between 85mph and 100mph. But every vehicle entered has been rejected so far. The only people who really need stupid **** like this is para-military units and PMC's, who will be doing more patrolling than fighting. Blackwater or Xe, whatever you want to call them, is actually producing one.
ok, i will admit my opinion has been heavily influenced by the mad max trilogy.

and i won’t claim that any unarmored vehicle is worthwhile on the frontline in modern combat.

just that if i was forced to chose which stupidity to engage in, i would chose a sand rail with a machine gun, over a pickup with a machine gun.

(i would not chose to drive into battle a dpv. I would be going the other way. and the sand rail allows me to run away at high speed, without having to deal with road hazards such as mines, ieds, and cross traffic (cross fire?)) the only issue would be reworking the seating so the gunner can fire in the direction of the enemy.


i have watched the news coverage of the libya action, from what i observed, i seems to me, in the hands of hords of poorly trained rebel forces, when you have heavy air support, from the worlds most modern military’s, the technical is just barely adequate in a fire fight, when your enemy, is a poorly trained, and equiped third world army on its last legs.

i think the most effective use of the pickup in that conflicted was using it as a light to medium mortar, or katuyusha (sp?) rocket platform. (that is, using it as a truck) but, had gadafi been alowed to field any sp. artillery, or roll even a few tanks well, wouldent have been pretty

to sum it up, you can take a dozen technical, carrying a company or so of gun-goons.

i will chose 2 or 3 marine scout/sniper teams, with a couple of medium machingun squads, the shooters equipped with barret .50 rifles, and the FAC. with laser designators and gps.
guess who wins.
December 4th, 2011  
CH3TN!K
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by wayword son
ok, i will admit my opinion has been heavily influenced by the mad max trilogy.

and i wonít claim that any unarmored vehicle is worthwhile on the frontline in modern combat.

just that if i was forced to chose which stupidity to engage in, i would chose a sand rail with a machine gun, over a pickup with a machine gun.

(i would not chose to drive into battle a dpv. I would be going the other way. and the sand rail allows me to run away at high speed, without having to deal with road hazards such as mines, ieds, and cross traffic (cross fire?)) the only issue would be reworking the seating so the gunner can fire in the direction of the enemy.


i have watched the news coverage of the libya action, from what i observed, i seems to me, in the hands of hords of poorly trained rebel forces, when you have heavy air support, from the worlds most modern militaryís, the technical is just barely adequate in a fire fight, when your enemy, is a poorly trained, and equiped third world army on its last legs.

i think the most effective use of the pickup in that conflicted was using it as a light to medium mortar, or katuyusha (sp?) rocket platform. (that is, using it as a truck) but, had gadafi been alowed to field any sp. artillery, or roll even a few tanks well, wouldent have been pretty

to sum it up, you can take a dozen technical, carrying a company or so of gun-goons.

i will chose 2 or 3 marine scout/sniper teams, with a couple of medium machingun squads, the shooters equipped with barret .50 rifles, and the FAC. with laser designators and gps.
guess who wins.
Now that's exactly what I'm thinking. Just give me an AS-50 and 60rds of .50BMG, and I think I will feel pretty safe against a goon in a pick-up, go-kart or even sharks with laser beams attached to their foreheads. lol
--
 


Similar Topics
Capture and Trade Strategy - Technical Term
Capture and Trade Strategy - Technical Term
What's your MOS (Military Occupational Specialty)?
Technical Failure Blamed in Deadly Crash (AP)