Humvee: tank replacements?

[badkuk]

i was watching Power Zone on discovery la few days ago... 4 x 4 ung feature...then i just thought: what if instead of tanks e Humvees na lang ang gamitin ng military?i doubt if humvees are more expensive than conventional tanks...easier to maintain pa, imho: a lot more parts, a lot more 4x4 experts around than tank experts

[afrasay]

hehe...akala ko magpapalit ka ng tanke ng crudo :D

[ghosthunter]

4x4 and tanks have their place on the battle field.

4x4 tend to be used as cavelry, where speed than firepower is more important.

Tanks tend to be used where more intense fighting would be expected.

[empy]

humvees are only good for tasks where speed is important, like recon.

they are lightly armored if at all, and i've seen footage in iraq, somalia, etc. where a grenade launcher can take a whole humvee out.

a tank, you can drive right up and over the enemy and they can't do anything about it unless they have tanks of their own or tank-killing missiles (typically aircraft-launched).

also, a tank has that huge gun which you can't mount anywhere on a humvee, which is very useful against armored structures and gun emplacements.

but you are right about the cost factor - the US military M1 Abrams main battle tank costs more than $4M, and i can only imagine how horrible the gas mileage is.

[mbt]

plus, a wheeled humvee simply isn't as go-anywhere as a tracked vehicle is

[badkuk]

mbt::plus, a wheeled humvee simply isn't as go-anywhere as a tracked vehicle is

...pero amphibious un...and june is just around the corner ;).

i guess a humvee will never be a tank...actually naisip ko lang ung primarily due to the cost factor

[atongk]

sir badkuk,

iba po kasi purpose ng humvee, mainly used for mobility and light weapons like LMGs and TOWs, as for "amphibious" - when used in military lingo are vehicles that can be launched / used from the sea towards the shore line or land. sorry po humvees are not amphibious pero kung mt pinatubo via crow valley tarlac,magandang gamitin ang mga ito. downside is mahal po ang parts, from US pa lahat walang pambili ang govt natin

yung tanks naman ay armored vehicles in tracks / that carries heavier arms ranging from 90mms to 105mms up. may armored plates siya for against small arms fire pero vulnerable din sa direct hits of RPGs and RRs

thinking aloud lang po

[mauler]

one big brick wall

Tank: No problem man!
Humvee: Cannot be, Borrow 1 from 2.

[ghosthunter]

Originally posted by mauler
one big brick wall

Tank: No problem man!
Humvee: Cannot be, Borrow 1 from 2.

Actually with a brick wall vs a Humvee, you could either use the MG mounted on the Humvee or a TOW missile or a demo pack.

[orly_andico]

7gpm ang mileage ng M1 (7 gallons per mile :P ) 1200hp Allison gas turbine.

and we thought the expedition was fuel-hungry....

of course the M1A3 (upgraded model) weights >65 tons, bagsak lahat ng bridge na madaanan niya...

[Drexx]

14Apr2004 (UTC -7)

Actually, you may not be very far off in your thinking. There have been some news speculation that the tank is getting "obsolete" (a very arguable term) in today's battlefield needs.

The M1 Abrams was designed during the Cold War era, primarily against Soviet-built tanks --you know, democratic countries versus communists. But the Soviet Union has been long gone and the threats are different. The battlefield threats are now shoulder-launched missiles, rocket-propelled grenades, incendiary Molotov cocktails, and the ubiquitous mines --inside urban areas where tanks don't really have a significant advantage!

So, some pundits in the Pentagon argue that wheeled vehicles are better for the battlefield of today. They are lighter, faster, much more manueverable, and cheaper.

[orly_andico]

hence the existence of the US army's Stryker combat vehicle, which is an 8-wheeled (rubber-tired) vehicle with a 120mm gun, same as the M1 series.

[pajerokid]

a humvee wouldnt be able to stand a direct RPG7 hit, unlike an A1 which would just laugh at one.