Why didn't they offer it on a warrior chassis :3 much better I say

Also, whats your view on the funky looking Ocelot replacement for the landrover? Funky but it looks like a winner, the USMC are looking at it to replace some varients of their hummers :D

I'm not sure about how well the Warrior would fare in Mortar Carrier role, but the Ocelot doesn't strike me as a worthwhile purchase; nor do any other MRAPs.

Many would be quick to object that MRAPs are ideal for convoys and road patrols in Iraq and Afghanistan, but that's also the problem --- they're a single-use vehicle, that isn't guaranteed to be usable in any future conflict.

They're tough against the light resistance offered by Iraqi and Afghan insurgents, but guerrilla armies aren't always that timid. They KNOW we're getting tired of occupying those countries, so they only have to wait us out (which is mostly what they're doing), but MRAPs would NOT hold-up to the kind of resistance the Mujahadeen threw at the Soviets (when a guerrilla victory hinged on causing massive damage continuously).

And then there's the little matter of conventional war --- e.g., how long do you supposed an MRAP-heavy formation would be able to endure against the Libyan Army, if a ground war is launched after allied airpower fails like it did in Kosovo?
(recall that the objective of Operation Allied Force was to destroy most of Serbia's 1300 AFVs --- only 15 were destroyed)

So ya see no point in hummers or land rovers at all?

You use Kosovo as an example but that wasn't a high intensity 'war' operation was it?...lol infact I know peeps who were ordered to sit and watch as sh!t went down, or be odered by some desk warrior general the wrong kinda think like forcibly ejecting the russians from some airport. If the serbians declared 'war' then rest assured, we wouldn;t be screaming in on 4x4 jeeps XD a fair amount of 'tank plinking' would occure instead, like in Gulf I

I am not defending them though XD our card-board boxes and the americans bullet magnets arent the best things to use screaming into battle but they do have uses...the ocelot is a damn sight safer than our vixens and WMICKs we use atm

"So ya see no point in hummers or land rovers at all?"
Those weren't part of the topic, which was MRAPs.


"You use Kosovo as an example but that wasn't a high intensity 'war' operation was it?"
I used Kosovo (and it's results) as an example of what airpower does to an enemy who is actually determined to resist --- namely, nothing. After that, you have to fight the enemy in a GROUND war, and if they only lost 15 of 1300 AFVs, you're in for one hell of a fight on the ground.
You don't want to be part of a column of MRAPs, if you have to take-on a professional army (by all accounts, the Iraqi Army doesn't count as one).

"If the serbians declared 'war' then rest assured, we wouldn;t be screaming in on 4x4 jeeps XD a fair amount of 'tank plinking' would occure instead, like in Gulf I"
Airpower in Operation Granby (sometime referred to as Desert Storm ) did NOT decimate the Iraqi Army's strength --- it only destroyed it's weakness, which was an exposed, centralized, top-down, and massively overconfident leadership.
After the war ended, and the shameless self-congragulationism began to die down, it was realized that the remaining strength of the Iraqi was still colossal. For one thing, there were more MBTs in the Iraqi Army immediately after Gulf War I than the ENTIRE Arab Alliance had at the start of the Six-Day War;
http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/.....8/hammond.html


What all this has to do with MRAPs is that their usefulness in ANY future guerrilla war depends solely upon airpower being able to defeat both the enemy's leadership AND their strength --- and such an accomplishment has so far failed to materialize.

Also note that the one major difference between GW1 and Kosovo was that GW1 was also a shooting war on the ground, and that it was spearheaded by Tracked Armor --- not by semi-bullet-resistant SUVs --- and said Tracked Armor destroyed more Iraqi AFVs than two weeks of airstrikes (conducted by several-times the airpower that NATO previously considered to be necessary to defeat the Warsaw Pact).

I know a few people who would argue against you and your 'nothing', I can say it forced them to operate differently than they overwise would of.
Also remember airstrikes were more aimed at destorying infrastructure and comms lines...not merely hunting armour which is the role of army units - including dedicated choppers, on both conflicts you mention.
It did decimate, it decimated their will to fight, thats for sure.

if they only lost 15 of 1300 AFVs, you're in for one hell of a fight on the ground.
and said Tracked Armor destroyed more Iraqi AFVs than two weeks of airstrikes on the ground.
lol

XD exactly, if we came across those 1285, a fair amount of tank plinking would have occured. I'm just thankfull it didn't go that way and that we didn't sit on our thumbs like Rwanda and stopped it lol I aint gonna discuss it anymore since all I was saying was the new kit appeals more than the older kit XD

LOL
It looks like Godzilla used it as a rollerblade.
also: "The Bradley Common chassis provides a battle proven survivability and mobility platform" - yeah, right ... *grabbing an AT rifle*
Taaaaaaaaaaaarget practise!

XD

Yea I know, not much of a challenge. You simply can't miss that huge thing.
Also, I could find out if my theory about SAPHEI rounds really works. =D

bah I prefer the BMP-2 in terms of Infantry Fighting Vehicles.

Yeah, but this is a Mortar Carrier, something an IFV hull isn't really cut-out for (especially one as cramped as that of the Bradley).

A Mortar carrier? hmm in that case for Mortar carrier I would prefer an M113 as a Mortar carrier.

That was the Army's finding in the 1970s as well, when it evaluated the possibility of using a Bradley chassis as a Mortar Carrier; it wouldn't perform anywhere near as well as the M113-based M1064.

From what I read with all your military related lectures, I see that your a big fan of the M113 APC :3

It's hard not to like the Swiss Army Knife of Light Armor!

Isn't it the most widely used APC in the world and also the most versatile?

I believe more M113s and variants were built ant any other APC, but it didn't quite match the distribution of Eastern Block Light Armor.

85000+ M113s have been built in 250 distinct variants, which have served the armed forces of over 52 countries (at least 40 still use them, including USA with nearly 10000 in-inventory).

By comparison, just 25000 BMP-1s were built, but over 60 countries used them, while BTR-60s were used by 70 countries (but again only 25000 were built).

well the Russians have vast amount APC's and IFV's still used by so many countries around the world.