Avatar feed
Responses: 6
LTC Stephen F.
6
6
0
It is interesting that the US Army is pushing to reinvigorate the Army's armor-branch following a decade and a half fighting insurgencies with a diminished presence of tanks and other large combat vehicles SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL.
In the past 40 years or so the threat assessment and force structure ratios of armor, aircraft, ships, submarines, special operations, missiles, etc,. have been linked in a chicken-egg relationship. It is not clear at times which has been the driving influence.
LTC Stephen C. Capt Seid Waddell CW5 (Join to see) SFC William Farrell SSgt (Join to see) SGT (Join to see) SP5 Mark Kuzinski SGT Forrest Stewart SPC (Join to see) SrA Christopher WrightMaj William W. 'Bill' Price Capt Tom BrownSSG James J. Palmer IV aka "JP4"SSgt Robert Marx TSgt Joe C. SGT Robert George PO2 Ed C.
(6)
Comment
(0)
SSgt Robert Marx
SSgt Robert Marx
>1 y
The armored forces definitely provide a great bang for its buck and the tanks still dominate the ground!
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
MAJ Ken Landgren
1
1
0
We should never be without heavy armor for conventional wars. Armor is designed to destroy most every ground threat at high speeds. It’s a tempo hard to defend against and hard to retreat from.
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SFC William Stephens A. Jr., 3 MSM, JSCM
1
1
0
But does the article talk about beefing up the 1AD or Armored DIV to a new platform of a M1 or we going to stay with he same kind of raggie type of system they have now, What is the Military doing to make a new tank. Are their plans for a new system? We are so behind on technology, I will give them credit they are trying to beef up the main gun system on the STRKER vehicle can anyone tell me how that's going.
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close