Originally posted by sigma:
Originally posted by Andy W.:
Originally posted by sigma:
Quote:

You aren't supposed to start making things after you out. You are supposed to have reserve ready.



Well hell. Let's just have one tank for every person in the Army then. Can't go wrong with too many of 'em!




Nice slippery slope. Although entirely off base.

You obviously have no idea the time it takes to get a project rolling in the gov't. First the RFS, then the bid time, then the design faze, then the infrastructure setup and material aquisitions. Then the personal aqusition and training, and finally they start. Private industry can get things done in a fraction of that time frame, but thanks to gov't tape it's not nearly that fast.

-Andy



Seeing that I've consulted on a number of projects regarding logistics for the DoD, DoT, and DHS I know quite well what is involved in military acquisition and deployment, thank you.

My point was supposed to be sarcasm, I thought that much was obvious. Fact is, the number of available tanks has never been a significant issue in Iraq this time around. Getting them to where they're needed at a particular time is another story.



Well, again, time for a little perspective. I was at Scania for the majority of my deployment. During that time, we did not have one Abrams, Bradley, or any other fighting vehicle heavier than a HMMWV. We didn't even have defensive mortar crews until mid-2004. Heaviest weapon on post was MK-19 Grenade machine gun. Nearly every logistical support item that went to Baghdad and North came through Scania.

Why weren't those defensive capabilities there? Lack of equipment (tanks go down for maintainance, and that takes a huge toll on your combat readiness) and trainted troops.

95 Contour SE ATX V6- SOLD 2001.5 VW Passat GLX V6 Tiptronic 2004 Honda VTX 1800N1 There are no stupid questions. There are a LOT of inquisitive idiots.