via Proceedings
Even with 30-millimeter-armed ACVs, the Marines will still lack a vehicle armed with a large-caliber direct-fire gun. However, there are many platforms similar to the ACV in active service that are armed with just such weapons. The Army’s Stryker Mobile Gun System, Japanese Type 16 Maneuver Combat Vehicle, and Italian Centauro are all armed with a 105-millimeter main gun. They are all also lighter than the ACV. Fielding such a vehicle would significantly reduce the logistical requirements on Marine units when compared to the Abrams while retaining the capability of an armored direct fire asset. This can be used not only to engage enemy vehicles, but also provide fire support to the infantry.
From main battle tanks to air-defense vehicles, the PLANMC’s vehicles outmatch those of the U.S. Marine Corps in firepower and armor protection. To win a fight with China, the Marine Corps will need to adopt new vehicles or substantially upgrade its existing ones.
Cue the standard response to these concerns. "Marine Air" will take care of it. "Long range artillery" will take care of it. "The Army" will take care of it.
It's all bullshit of course. Don't get me wrong. If they're available they'll fight, fight hard and send all they see to hell. But they'll probably be up to their necks in their own dramas.
The reality?
The Marine Air-Ground Task Force no longer exists.
Berger has killed it along with the Marines capability of fighting on the ground. The Marine Corps is back to at BEST naval infantry. In reality its just a missile slinging air arm.
You wonder why I couldn't get mad at reports that a new (lame duck) defense official had called for the dismantling of the Marine Corps? With its new "force design" the Marines no longer make monetary or manpower sense!
No comments :
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.