Thanks to Gunner for the info.
 |
| PTS-4 |
 |
| PTS-M
I am intrigued by this vehicle. The Russians use it as a type of surrogate landing craft and ended up with a vehicle that is in some ways more capable than what the West is using.
Russian amphibious doctrine emphasizes raids or combined action when it comes to an assault. They tend to use their Naval Infantry and Airborne forces to compliment/support each other to a greater degree than the US and even the British.
What will be interesting is to see whether the acquisition of the French Mistral LHD changes their normal operating procedure. By that I mean over the horizon assaults aren't stressed and they tend to operate within sight of the beach with much more comfort than US forces. Whether the LHD pushes them further out to sea and negates the utility of the PTS-4 and PTS-M remains to be seen.
   Sidenote: Shas recommends the Vityaz ATV for comparison sake. Amazing. But considering the fact that the US military is seriously looking at ops in the Arctic, it might be time to consider a similar vehicle. |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:PKP_trailer_with_a_gun.JPG
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5iGsSWHOTA4
DeleteThis is the sort of vehicle we Brits could use.
Forget about that trailer, it was a massive fail. You can't use back ramp when you attach trailer and even with a slight wave it try to sink, not to mention serious problem with steering. Some of more crazy engineers in Polish Army turn some of them in to motorboats, but that was long, long time ago.
DeleteNever said the trailer was a good idea; I just liked it.
DeleteBoth interesting vehicles. Leave it to the Ruskies to come up with an armored DUKW! Articulated rig looks like it was stolen from Hagglunds and kicked up a notch? You may be right about using BPC for less than full assaults especially since no country seems willing to stop Russia from annexing its former sattelite states~
ReplyDeleteLooks like a outsized version Hägglunds Bandvagn 206.
ReplyDelete...and none of that thinking has any relevance to USMC's future.
ReplyDeleteWhere could these tractors come from ?
Surely not from 70nm+ offshore.
Same challenge as with AAV-7...
Only connectors will give these tractors any utility by first delivering them 'dry' to then have them get 'wet' for crossing tidal streams, rivers, a pond or small lake etc.
Sure, an AAV-7 could drag a wheeled barge/float across a pond...
you really can't see whats going on can you. Amos reversing the sleeves down initiative, delaying a decision on women in the infantry, doing town halls with junior Marines.
Deletehe's working hard to do two things. get his reputation up so he won't go down in history as the worst Commandant ever AND trying his best to make sure that all his initiatives aren't reversed on the first day of the next Commandant's term.
its obvious that none of this is working and neither is the Sea Base concept. Amos was a disease, the SBC was flawed and the Marine Corps is in worse shape today than it was when he came into office.
fuck Amos.
Solomon, I may know just enough to clearly analyze weak-points in thinking.
DeleteAnd the romance of chugging via tractor from ship-to-shore is one of those that scream at full decibel.
The future of USMC is at stake getting the Connector-challenge right.
Failure to coherently and fiscally-plausibly address the issue will cost you massively in mid-term political support on the Hill and the White House - whoever is running things there.
USMC must staunchly reassert amphibious capabilities that match non-permissive realities. ARG/MEUs on the horizon to allow any type of 'floating' APCs to eventually reach the beach is not doable in that tactical context.
And you would agree with that.
so we're developing air sea battle to deal with the anti-access problem but at the same time for an amphibious assault we won't have dealt with the anti-access problem?
Deletethats faulty thinking my friend. asb means that amphibious assault as currently conducted is still viable. the problem is simple. we have conflicting concepts. asb is suppose to fight our way to the shore and sea base means we surrender the fight and stay off shore
Hate the quirky term connector, prefer landing craft and lighterage,BUT 2020 is right. Our Navy has to have many, reasonably priced landing craft to LIFT Marine tactical equipment ashore. The day of the "assault swimmer" is OVER, let it be.
DeleteAnd of course, there will be a "seabase" or what ever group of warships and sealift ship sitting offshore just as there was in WW2, BUT the distance wlll be greater and is subject to debate. Whether ALL landing craft HAVE to be fully amphibious is equally debatable. And the warships and sealift ships MUST be interoperable
dude you're wrong. you're thiinking like a sailor. or to be more precise you're thinking like a MSC sailor.
Deleteall you can see is ship to shore. after that you wash your hands of the issue. for the Marines its not that simple. landing craft are vulnerable. so are helicopters. the only armored transport from ship to shore is the AAV... its days ARE NOT OVER.
additionally explain to me what a sea base actually is? a collection of ships hovering at a designated distance offshore? bullshit, thats simple a fleet or flotilla or whatever you call a group of ships.
the mythical "seabase" is the biggest lie the Marine Corps ever sold congress.
During my two tours as a Gator Sailor, I put plenty of Marines in amtracs and landing craft ashore. Managed Prepo ships full of Marine gear, in went ashore. Followed that with buying three MPF-E ships to sealift Marine and Navy cargo and put that ashore via Navy pontoons. Those were from OFFSHORE sometimes closer than the other depending on the op.
ReplyDeleteI am completely aware of the need to move Marines and their gear all the way past the beach and inland. They need vehicles and aircraft to do that. Most landing craft stop at the waterline, even the SSC will only go so far up the beach.
Current and future AAVP and ACV will spend about 80% of their time on land missions. WHY do the Marines think they need a slow assault swimmer for the future? Do you expect them to come out of the surf (after a long ride) and start shooting at the enemy yards away? Come on that is WW2~
When was the last time you splashed off a stern ramp in a AAVP?
The seabase exists today as it has in the past under a different name, and as it will in the future. BTW Amphibious Task Group ATG is the term you maybe looking for? Check some of the recent Marine documents you have referred to. You may not have realized that Amphibs (and sometimes MPS) and Marines offshore are highly organized into a seabase or ATG or whatever term you want~
A very important thing in relation to they then is, you don't need to visit their particular offices personally, you are able to interact with all of them on the net for your needs and they will send their particular associates to see your website in the event that needed. car freight shipping
ReplyDelete