Mortar guy
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 25
- Points
- 330
I'll make the intro to the next edition a little lighter - maybe with a focus on moustache maintenance in patrol bases?
Mortar guy said:I'll make the intro to the next edition a little lighter - maybe with a focus on moustache maintenance in patrol bases?
daftandbarmy said:Speaking of drool, I have just read the first edition of the Infantry newsletter and I think I want a LAV 6 and a TAPV now.
Reminds me of this scene from Pentagon Wars about the M2 Bradley https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXQ2lO3ieBAOstrozac said:Good for you. At least somebody is excited about them.
LAV 6 looks like a bit of a burden for the maintainers (recovery in particular is a nightmare) and TAPV (depending on who you talk to) is either a light vehicle that isn't very light, or a personnel carrier that can't carry many personnel.
Ostrozac said:Good for you. At least somebody is excited about them.
LAV 6 looks like a bit of a burden for the maintainers (recovery in particular is a nightmare) and TAPV (depending on who you talk to) is either a light vehicle that isn't very light, or a personnel carrier that can't carry many personnel.
MCG said:So, let's get back to the topic of PRes.
I believe we have other threads for TAPV, LAV and the failings of major projects.
I am a longtime lurker here but always enjoy reading this thread. Some of the things written here should be thrown into the Infantry Newsletter to generate Corps-wide debate in the RCIC. There are too few PRes articles in the Newsletter, and there are too many topics that need daylight, for this not to happen. If anyone wants to dive in, PM me.
Loch Sloy! said:....
With respect to TAPV, I see on the Texetron website that there is a stretched infantry carrier variant. ....
Loch Sloy! said:I will suggest to him that he submit something to you Sir. The take home point of his presentation was that the Aussies and the Brits seem to turn out trained infantry officers much more efficiently than we do.
daftandbarmy said:My unit has several 'non-trade qualified' 2Lts lurking around who have had more than one kick at the can and have yet to pass.
dapaterson said:Is the problem in the selection process, in the unit-level indoctrination of young officers, in the training system, or some combination of all of those factors?
ArmyRick said:-Another approach, is target strong private/corporals as they enter university
Journeyman said:Take the Reservists whose priority is Mess Kit/badges/feather boas (you can likely lure them all together by organizing a Garrison Ball soirée on a field training weekend), and dump them directly into the Legion of Frontiersmen.
For the specific individuals that the Reserves would lose, I'd risk it; step two would then be realistic command hierarchies -- no more LCols commanding Pl(+) / Coy(-) organizations. :nod:Haggis said:Are your numbers getting low? ;D