±Recent Visitors

Recent Visitors to Com-Central!

±User Info-big


Welcome Anonymous

Nickname
Password

Membership:
Latest: HighestAce
New Today: 0
New Yesterday: 0
Overall: 6648

People Online:
Members: 0
Visitors: 598
Total: 598
Who Is Where:
 Visitors:
01: Community Forums
02: Community Forums
03: Member Screenshots
04: Downloads
05: Home
06: Photo Gallery
07: Community Forums
08: Home
09: Downloads
10: Community Forums
11: Home
12: Your Account
13: Home
14: Community Forums
15: Photo Gallery
16: Community Forums
17: Home
18: Community Forums
19: Member Screenshots
20: Your Account
21: News Archive
22: Community Forums
23: Member Screenshots
24: News Archive
25: Community Forums
26: Community Forums
27: Home
28: Community Forums
29: Community Forums
30: Community Forums
31: Home
32: Community Forums
33: Community Forums
34: Community Forums
35: Community Forums
36: Community Forums
37: Community Forums
38: Downloads
39: Community Forums
40: Community Forums
41: Member Screenshots
42: Community Forums
43: Community Forums
44: Photo Gallery
45: Community Forums
46: Community Forums
47: Home
48: Home
49: Community Forums
50: Community Forums
51: Community Forums
52: Community Forums
53: Member Screenshots
54: Downloads
55: Community Forums
56: Community Forums
57: Your Account
58: News Archive
59: Statistics
60: Statistics
61: Community Forums
62: Community Forums
63: Community Forums
64: Statistics
65: Home
66: Community Forums
67: Statistics
68: Community Forums
69: Community Forums
70: Home
71: Home
72: Member Screenshots
73: Your Account
74: Home
75: Downloads
76: Community Forums
77: Community Forums
78: Community Forums
79: Community Forums
80: Community Forums
81: Home
82: Home
83: Community Forums
84: Community Forums
85: Community Forums
86: Search
87: Downloads
88: Community Forums
89: Member Screenshots
90: Community Forums
91: Photo Gallery
92: Community Forums
93: Community Forums
94: Member Screenshots
95: Community Forums
96: Home
97: Community Forums
98: Community Forums
99: Home
100: Home
101: Community Forums
102: Downloads
103: Home
104: Community Forums
105: Community Forums
106: News Archive
107: Community Forums
108: Community Forums
109: Community Forums
110: Member Screenshots
111: Member Screenshots
112: Photo Gallery
113: Downloads
114: Community Forums
115: Photo Gallery
116: Photo Gallery
117: Member Screenshots
118: Community Forums
119: Home
120: Community Forums
121: Community Forums
122: Community Forums
123: Community Forums
124: News Archive
125: Community Forums
126: Home
127: Community Forums
128: Community Forums
129: Member Screenshots
130: Downloads
131: Community Forums
132: Community Forums
133: Community Forums
134: Community Forums
135: Community Forums
136: Community Forums
137: Photo Gallery
138: Home
139: Photo Gallery
140: Home
141: Home
142: News Archive
143: Community Forums
144: Member Screenshots
145: Community Forums
146: Community Forums
147: Downloads
148: Community Forums
149: Community Forums
150: Member Screenshots
151: Community Forums
152: Photo Gallery
153: Community Forums
154: Member Screenshots
155: Community Forums
156: Community Forums
157: Home
158: Community Forums
159: Community Forums
160: Community Forums
161: Photo Gallery
162: Community Forums
163: Community Forums
164: Home
165: Community Forums
166: Community Forums
167: Community Forums
168: Community Forums
169: Community Forums
170: Community Forums
171: Photo Gallery
172: Photo Gallery
173: Home
174: Home
175: Community Forums
176: Community Forums
177: Community Forums
178: Community Forums
179: Community Forums
180: Downloads
181: Community Forums
182: Photo Gallery
183: Home
184: Downloads
185: Community Forums
186: Community Forums
187: Community Forums
188: Downloads
189: Home
190: Community Forums
191: Downloads
192: Community Forums
193: Photo Gallery
194: Statistics
195: Home
196: Member Screenshots
197: News
198: Photo Gallery
199: Downloads
200: Member Screenshots
201: Community Forums
202: Photo Gallery
203: Home
204: Community Forums
205: Community Forums
206: Community Forums
207: Community Forums
208: Home
209: Member Screenshots
210: Photo Gallery
211: Community Forums
212: News
213: Community Forums
214: Community Forums
215: Community Forums
216: Community Forums
217: Community Forums
218: Community Forums
219: Photo Gallery
220: Community Forums
221: Community Forums
222: Downloads
223: Community Forums
224: Home
225: Community Forums
226: News Archive
227: Community Forums
228: Community Forums
229: Community Forums
230: Your Account
231: Home
232: Community Forums
233: Community Forums
234: Home
235: Community Forums
236: Photo Gallery
237: Home
238: Community Forums
239: Home
240: Home
241: Member Screenshots
242: Statistics
243: Community Forums
244: Community Forums
245: Community Forums
246: Community Forums
247: Community Forums
248: Photo Gallery
249: Community Forums
250: Community Forums
251: Member Screenshots
252: Community Forums
253: Community Forums
254: Home
255: Member Screenshots
256: Community Forums
257: Community Forums
258: Home
259: News Archive
260: Your Account
261: Home
262: Home
263: Community Forums
264: Member Screenshots
265: Downloads
266: Community Forums
267: Member Screenshots
268: News Archive
269: Community Forums
270: Community Forums
271: Downloads
272: Photo Gallery
273: Community Forums
274: Photo Gallery
275: Photo Gallery
276: Community Forums
277: Home
278: Member Screenshots
279: Community Forums
280: Home
281: Home
282: Community Forums
283: Community Forums
284: Home
285: Photo Gallery
286: Downloads
287: Community Forums
288: Your Account
289: Community Forums
290: Home
291: Community Forums
292: Downloads
293: News Archive
294: Home
295: Community Forums
296: Downloads
297: Community Forums
298: Community Forums
299: Photo Gallery
300: Community Forums
301: Community Forums
302: Community Forums
303: Community Forums
304: Downloads
305: Home
306: Home
307: Community Forums
308: Community Forums
309: Community Forums
310: Community Forums
311: Community Forums
312: Community Forums
313: Your Account
314: Community Forums
315: News
316: Community Forums
317: Home
318: Home
319: Home
320: Community Forums
321: Community Forums
322: Member Screenshots
323: Member Screenshots
324: Community Forums
325: Community Forums
326: Home
327: Community Forums
328: Your Account
329: Community Forums
330: Statistics
331: Home
332: Community Forums
333: Your Account
334: Photo Gallery
335: Community Forums
336: Community Forums
337: Community Forums
338: Member Screenshots
339: Community Forums
340: Photo Gallery
341: Community Forums
342: Statistics
343: Community Forums
344: Your Account
345: Community Forums
346: Photo Gallery
347: Community Forums
348: Downloads
349: Community Forums
350: Community Forums
351: Community Forums
352: Member Screenshots
353: Member Screenshots
354: Community Forums
355: Community Forums
356: Downloads
357: Home
358: Your Account
359: Community Forums
360: Member Screenshots
361: Community Forums
362: Community Forums
363: Community Forums
364: Home
365: Community Forums
366: Community Forums
367: Home
368: Community Forums
369: Statistics
370: Photo Gallery
371: Photo Gallery
372: Community Forums
373: Community Forums
374: Home
375: Home
376: Downloads
377: Community Forums
378: Community Forums
379: Member Screenshots
380: Community Forums
381: Photo Gallery
382: Community Forums
383: Community Forums
384: Community Forums
385: Home
386: Community Forums
387: Community Forums
388: Downloads
389: Downloads
390: Home
391: Your Account
392: Photo Gallery
393: Your Account
394: News Archive
395: Photo Gallery
396: News Archive
397: Member Screenshots
398: Community Forums
399: Community Forums
400: Community Forums
401: Community Forums
402: Photo Gallery
403: Downloads
404: Downloads
405: Community Forums
406: Home
407: Community Forums
408: Community Forums
409: Photo Gallery
410: Statistics
411: Community Forums
412: Downloads
413: Home
414: Community Forums
415: Your Account
416: Community Forums
417: Photo Gallery
418: Member Screenshots
419: Photo Gallery
420: Community Forums
421: Community Forums
422: Photo Gallery
423: Home
424: Community Forums
425: Home
426: Community Forums
427: Photo Gallery
428: Community Forums
429: Home
430: Downloads
431: Community Forums
432: Community Forums
433: Home
434: Community Forums
435: Home
436: Home
437: Community Forums
438: Community Forums
439: Photo Gallery
440: Community Forums
441: Community Forums
442: Community Forums
443: Community Forums
444: Home
445: Community Forums
446: Community Forums
447: News
448: Downloads
449: Community Forums
450: Downloads
451: Community Forums
452: Home
453: Photo Gallery
454: Downloads
455: Community Forums
456: Community Forums
457: Your Account
458: Community Forums
459: Photo Gallery
460: Community Forums
461: Downloads
462: Your Account
463: Home
464: Downloads
465: Community Forums
466: Photo Gallery
467: Community Forums
468: Home
469: Community Forums
470: Community Forums
471: Community Forums
472: Home
473: Community Forums
474: Downloads
475: Community Forums
476: Photo Gallery
477: Community Forums
478: Community Forums
479: Home
480: Your Account
481: Community Forums
482: Photo Gallery
483: Community Forums
484: Community Forums
485: Community Forums
486: Community Forums
487: Community Forums
488: Community Forums
489: Community Forums
490: Community Forums
491: Community Forums
492: Downloads
493: Contact
494: Member Screenshots
495: Home
496: Home
497: Community Forums
498: Community Forums
499: Home
500: Downloads
501: Your Account
502: Community Forums
503: Community Forums
504: Community Forums
505: Community Forums
506: Community Forums
507: Community Forums
508: Community Forums
509: Community Forums
510: News Archive
511: Community Forums
512: Community Forums
513: News
514: Photo Gallery
515: News
516: News Archive
517: Home
518: Photo Gallery
519: Community Forums
520: Community Forums
521: Photo Gallery
522: Home
523: Community Forums
524: Community Forums
525: Photo Gallery
526: Community Forums
527: Community Forums
528: Community Forums
529: Your Account
530: Photo Gallery
531: Member Screenshots
532: Home
533: Community Forums
534: Home
535: Home
536: Community Forums
537: Community Forums
538: Community Forums
539: Home
540: Photo Gallery
541: Photo Gallery
542: Community Forums
543: Community Forums
544: Home
545: Community Forums
546: Community Forums
547: Community Forums
548: Community Forums
549: Community Forums
550: Home
551: Home
552: Community Forums
553: Community Forums
554: Community Forums
555: Community Forums
556: Member Screenshots
557: Community Forums
558: Community Forums
559: Photo Gallery
560: Community Forums
561: Home
562: Community Forums
563: Community Forums
564: Community Forums
565: Home
566: Community Forums
567: Community Forums
568: News Archive
569: Home
570: Community Forums
571: Home
572: Photo Gallery
573: Community Forums
574: Photo Gallery
575: Photo Gallery
576: Community Forums
577: Downloads
578: Home
579: Your Account
580: Member Screenshots
581: Community Forums
582: Downloads
583: Photo Gallery
584: Home
585: Community Forums
586: Community Forums
587: Community Forums
588: News
589: Community Forums
590: Community Forums
591: Home
592: Community Forums
593: Community Forums
594: Home
595: Community Forums
596: Home
597: Community Forums
598: Community Forums

Staff Online:

No staff members are online!
Stryker MGS
The AFV ASSOCIATION was formed in 1964 to support the thoughts and research of all those interested in Armored Fighting Vehicles and related topics, such as AFV drawings. The emphasis has always been on sharing information and communicating with other members of similar interests; e.g. German armor, Japanese AFVs, or whatever.
Post new topic    Reply to topic    Printer Friendly Page     Forum Index ›  AFV News Discussion Board

View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Roy_A_Lingle
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 1997
Location: El Paso & Ft Bliss, Texas
PostPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 8:33 am
Post subject: Stryker MGS

Hi CIA Agents and all other folks!

Found the following photos over at the the US Army mil web site. Looks like the MGS is finally getting into the hands of the crews who will be using them. These photos are of the 1st SBCT, 25th ID at Ft Wainwright.



For the smaller version and the caption:

www.army.mil/-images/2...09/05/7618



For the smaller version and the caption:

www.army.mil/-images/2...09/05/7619

My 2 cents, think of the MGS as an upgrade from the M151 jeep with a M40/106mm RR carring six rounds of HEAT. Don't think of it as a down grade from a MBT.

Spot Report!
Sgt, Scouts Out!

_________________
"You can never have too much reconnaissance."
General G.S. Patton Jr.


Last edited by Roy_A_Lingle on Fri Oct 12, 2007 10:51 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
mumfordlibrarian
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 8

PostPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 11:37 am
Post subject: Re: Stryker MGS

Roy this seems to be a "walks like a duck" vehicle. The Army seems to be insisting that this is not an anti-tank weapon.

Paul T. Weaver
mumfordlibrarian
Back to top
View user's profile
Roy_A_Lingle
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 1997
Location: El Paso & Ft Bliss, Texas
PostPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 11:55 am
Post subject: Re: Stryker MGS

Hi Paul! Hi Folks!

- mumfordlibrarian

Roy this seems to be a "walks like a duck" vehicle. The Army seems to be insisting that this is not an anti-tank weapon.

Paul T. Weaver
mumfordlibrarian


I think the trick to that would be to use some airplane thinking.

Many fighter planes where built to be used as a fighter. A number of those same fighter planes could be used as bombers.

A good example might be the F104 Starfighter. Clearly a fighter plane, yet during Vietnam, the Air Force hung bombs off them and used them to attack ground targets.

Now it can carry bombs and it can attack ground targets, so it's a bomber right? No, it's a fighter plane that if need be can be used as a bomber.

The MGS is a bit like those old F104s, it can be used to kill tanks, but that is not it's main job. The primary job is direct heavy fire support for the infantryman in contact with enemy infantry.
It's not a duck, but it can, if need be quack like a duck.

Tank killing in the Stryker BCT is the primary job of the TOW carriers.

Just keep telling yourselfs, it's not a tank, it's not a tank, it's not a tank.
Sgt, Scouts Out!

_________________
"You can never have too much reconnaissance."
General G.S. Patton Jr.
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
bsmart
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 2523
Location: Central Maryland
PostPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 12:14 pm
Post subject: Re: Stryker MGS

- Roy_A_Lingle
Hi Paul! Hi Folks!

- mumfordlibrarian

Roy this seems to be a "walks like a duck" vehicle. The Army seems to be insisting that this is not an anti-tank weapon.

Paul T. Weaver
mumfordlibrarian


I think the trick to that would be to use some airplane thinking.

Many fighter planes where built to be used as a fighter. A number of those same fighter planes could be used as bombers.

A good example might be the F104 Starfighter. Clearly a fighter plane, yet during Vietnam, the Air Force hung bombs off them and used them to attack ground targets.

Now it can carry bombs and it can attack ground targets, so it's a bomber right? No, it's a fighter plane that if need be can be used as a bomber.

The MGS is a bit like those old F104s, it can be used to kill tanks, but that is not it's main job. The primary job is direct heavy fire support for the infantryman in contact with enemy infantry.
It's not a duck, but it can, if need be quack like a duck.

Tank killing in the Stryker BCT is the primary job of the TOW carriers.

Just keep telling yourselfs, it's not a tank, it's not a tank, it's not a tank.
Sgt, Scouts Out!


I like your general analogy but you chose the wrong example. If you had said F-100 or F-4 I would totally agree but the F-104 was the one totally wrong answer. The U.S. never used the F-104 as a ground attack plane. In fact it was pretty much being slowly taken out of the active force when there was a competition for a new NATO standard strike plane. Lockheed took the basic shape of the F-104 and redisgned everyrhing about it. New airframe, new wings, new cockpit new (upward firing) ejection seat (The original F-104 ejection seat ejected downward, not a good idea for a strike plane that would operate primarily down on the deck). This was designated the F-104G (except in Canada where I think it was the F-104D but I will have to check) The F-104G got a bad reputation early on. It was later figured out that most of the problem was that the plane was much hotter than the F-84s and G-91s that most of the pilots had been used to. As pilot training and experience went up the track record got better. But thinking the late model F-104s that were used as strike aircraft were the same ones as the early F-104C that the USAF used is like saying the M46 and the M60 are both Patton tanks

_________________
Bob Smart (bsmart@xecu.net)
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
Dontos
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 3436
Location: Vine Grove, KY
PostPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 12:38 pm
Post subject: Re: Stryker MGS

- Roy_A_Lingle
Hi Paul! Hi Folks!

- mumfordlibrarian

Roy this seems to be a "walks like a duck" vehicle. The Army seems to be insisting that this is not an anti-tank weapon.

Paul T. Weaver
mumfordlibrarian


I think the trick to that would be to use some airplane thinking.

Many fighter planes where built to be used as a fighter. A number of those same fighter planes could be used as bombers.

A good example might be the F104 Starfighter. Clearly a fighter plane, yet during Vietnam, the Air Force hung bombs off them and used them to attack ground targets.

Now it can carry bombs and it can attack ground targets, so it's a bomber right? No, it's a fighter plane that if need be can be used as a bomber.

The MGS is a bit like those old F104s, it can be used to kill tanks, but that is not it's main job. The primary job is direct heavy fire support for the infantryman in contact with enemy infantry.
It's not a duck, but it can, if need be quack like a duck.

Tank killing in the Stryker BCT is the primary job of the TOW carriers.

Just keep telling yourselfs, it's not a tank, it's not a tank, it's not a tank.
Sgt, Scouts Out!


at the 2006 Armor Symposium, I met up with one of my former TC's from one of my tank platoons. An excellent NCO who really knew his stuff. He had been on the MGS for a couple of years. Amoung other things he simply reinforced the point that the MGS, IS NOT A TANK Shocked , and its primary function is 'Infantry Support".

I equated the parallels of its stated mission, to of the Ontos. Totally dedicated to the role of 'Infantry Support'. (Although the Ontos was classified as a 'Tank Destroyer'.

The problem I think is the mistaken belief that the MGS is a subsitute/replacement for the AGS or even the Sheridan.

The Air Force analogy is a bit off. I was actually surprised that Bob didn't write that.... Rolling Eyes Mr. Green

(ROY you are hereby fined 50 COOL points!! Cool Don't let that happen again..!!)

Don
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger Photo Gallery
Roy_A_Lingle
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 1997
Location: El Paso & Ft Bliss, Texas
PostPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 1:45 pm
Post subject: Re: Stryker MGS

Hi Bob! Hi Folks!

- bsmart

I like your general analogy but you chose the wrong example. If you had said F-100 or F-4 I would totally agree but the F-104 was the one totally wrong answer. The U.S. never used the F-104 as a ground attack plane.

Shocked Say what? Confused
Bob, this VERY OLD JARHEAD is going to have to bring you up to date on some very old history.

During 1966 into the first half of 1967, an Air Force F104 Starfighter unit based at Da Nang, RVN was sending those birds up with ONE BOMB under each wing.

Also this old Scout must report that during one FTX at Hohenfels FRG, sometime around 1975 or 1976, while conducting Castle Guard for the Battalion TOC, the TOC was attacked by four West German F104s. I would guess that if those German F104s were conducting that type of mission during peace time, they were planning on using those A/Cs for that type of mission against Warsaw Pack AFVs.

I though about using the F4, but I went with the F104 because I feel it is possible the best example of something build to do one thing and commanders turned around and used it for something it could just barely do.

Some of my very old history. Sorry no pictures to help back up my claims. Crying or Very sad
Sgt, Scouts Out!

_________________
"You can never have too much reconnaissance."
General G.S. Patton Jr.


Last edited by Roy_A_Lingle on Sat Sep 08, 2007 4:37 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
bsmart
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 2523
Location: Central Maryland
PostPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 2:01 pm
Post subject: Re: Stryker MGS

Not doubting your claims. Let me check a couple sources this evening about the Vitenam connection.

The German connection is no problem. That was the F-104G that was a complete redesign of the plane under the same name. The G model was designed as a strike fighter first with a secondary Air to Air capability. To bring it full circle the Italians later reworked the F-104G design with new radar and missles into the F-104S which was a primary all weather interceptor that even carried AIM-7 Sparrow missles in addition to the AIM-9 Sidewinders that were always available on the F-104G

_________________
Bob Smart (bsmart@xecu.net)
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
Roy_A_Lingle
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 1997
Location: El Paso & Ft Bliss, Texas
PostPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 2:08 pm
Post subject: Re: Stryker MGS

Hi Bob! Hi Folks!

- bsmart

That was the F-104G that was a complete redesign of the plane under the same name. The G model was designed as a strike fighter first with a secondary Air to Air capability.


Say what? Shocked Strike Fighter! Shocked Shocked
Will that just shows you all how little I know about things with wings!

I hope you find something on the miss use of the F104 in Vietnam. I know their were not flying CAS missions for the Marines, so I guess they were either going out west or up north.

Time for bed, later folks!
Sgt, Scouts Out!

_________________
"You can never have too much reconnaissance."
General G.S. Patton Jr.
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
Doug_Kibbey
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 4678
Location: The Great Satan
PostPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 2:10 pm
Post subject: Re: Stryker MGS

"G-71 coming to assist element of second platoon, over!" Laughing

(This is an excerpt from a longer article, Joe Baugher is a recognized source, listed at bottom)


"The F-104C (Lockheed Model 483-04-05) was the tactical strike version of the Starfighter. It was designed to meet the needs of the Tactical Air Command (TAC), which had earlier found the F-104A to be unacceptable because of its low endurance and its inability to carry significant offensive payloads.

In April of 1965, a single squadron (the 476th TFS) of the 479th TFW deployed with their F-104Cs to Kung Kuan AB in Taiwan, with regular rotations to the forward base at Da Nang Air Base in South Vietnam. Their job was to fly MiG combat air patrol (MiGCAP) missions to protect American fighter bombers against attack by North Vietnamese fighters. They flew these missions armed with their single M61A1 20-mm cannon and four AIM-9 Sidewinder air-to-air missiles. The effect of F-104 deployment upon NVN and PRC MiG operations was immediate and dramatic--NVN MiGs soon learned to avoid contact with USAF strikes being covered by F-104s. During the entire deployment of the 476th only two fleeting encounters between F-104Cs and enemy fighters occurred.

As the MiG threat abated, the 476th TFS was tasked with some weather reconnaissance and ground attack missions. A few of these were against targets in North Vietnam, but most of them were close air-support missions against targets in the South under forward air controller direction. The F-104s were fairly successful in this role, gaining a reputation for accuracy in their cannon fire and their bombing and capable of quite rapid reaction times in response to requests for air support. During this period, the 476th F-104s maintained an in-commission rate of 94.7%, a testimony both to the quality of 476th maintenance personnel and to the simplicity and maintainability of F-104 systems. However, an F-104 went down during a sortie 100 nm SSW of DaNang on June 29. The pilot was rescued with minor injuries.

The 436th TFS assumed the 476th's commitment in DaNang on 11 July, and the 436th began flying combat sorties the next day. Although a few MiGCAP missions were flown, the majority of the missions were quick-reaction close-air support missions in support of ground troops. On July 23, Capt. Roy Blakely attempted to crash-land his battle-damaged F-104C at Chu Lai. Blakely successfully set his aircraft down gear-up, but died when his F-104 swerved off the runway into a sand dune. "

Source: home.att.net/~jbaugher1/f104_9.html
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website Photo Gallery
bsmart
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 2523
Location: Central Maryland
PostPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 6:17 pm
Post subject: Re: Stryker MGS

Looks like I blew it

I haven't found the book I'm looking for but that's okay. I thought the F-104s had been deployed as Anti Mig cover but not used as attack aircraft. Part of my confusion was mis remembering a picture of an F-106 with a bomb under it's wing that was done as a joke on the commander of Air Defence Command. PACAF F-102s were deployed to Bien Hoa and Da Nang in Vietnam and Udorn and Don Muang in Thailand as Air Defence but eventually withdrawn by 1969 without ever engaging in combat.

I shoulkd have known not to try and correct a scout Rolling Eyes

Oh Doug thanks for reminding me about Joe Baughers aircraft pages. I had been there before but in a series of machine replacements had lost the links. His coverage is excellent. This is his page on the F04s acceptance as a NATO strike fighter.
home.att.net/~jbaugher...04_11.html
He leaves some questions unanswered that are actually well known. Let's just say that there were cases of Bribery involving Lockheed and some European officials that were strong enough that Lockheed now has a VERY STRONG ethics program and annual training about 'Truth in Negotiations', 'Foreign Corrupt Practices' and other ethics courses are now mandatory annual training throughout Lockheed Martin

Oh I found it interesting that of the 722 Starfighters ordered for the USAF only 296 were delivered before the contract was cancelled. The NATO deal was all AFTER that.

_________________
Bob Smart (bsmart@xecu.net)
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
Doug_Kibbey
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 4678
Location: The Great Satan
PostPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 6:32 pm
Post subject: Re: Stryker MGS

- bsmart
.

I shoulkd have known not to try and correct a scout Rolling Eyes



Scouts always stand to be corrected...where you went so horribly wrong was bring to one under fire without keeping in mind that since scouting is their primary function, they normally will not engage unless they know they've got another element in position to bring mutually supporting fire to bear in case it's needed. Laughing ( "G" Troop emerges victorious.)

But hey, you're Air Force, how could you could know? Don on the other hand.....(and does this mean Roy gets his "cool points" back? Mr. Green )

I think somewhere in there the article also notes that F104's also got credit for no air-to-air kills in VN, but that needs to be double checked.

AND....I owe my familiarity with Joe Baugher's pages to....Jeff Button, an 11C turned Transportation (where'd he go, anyway?), so there you go...we be's multidiciplinary at the AFV DG!


Last edited by Doug_Kibbey on Fri Sep 07, 2007 8:52 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website Photo Gallery
piney
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 2330
Location: Republic of Southern New Jersey
PostPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 7:29 pm
Post subject: Re: Stryker MGS

does that mean we have to invite swabbies? Laughing

Jeff Lewis
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
Dontos
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 3436
Location: Vine Grove, KY
PostPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 8:25 pm
Post subject: Re: Stryker MGS

- piney
does that mean we have to invite swabbies? Laughing

Jeff Lewis


There already are several 'floating' around the AFV DG.... Laughing Laughing Laughing

Mr. Green

sorry....

Don
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger Photo Gallery
bsmart
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 2523
Location: Central Maryland
PostPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 9:19 pm
Post subject: Re: Stryker MGS

- piney
does that mean we have to invite swabbies? Laughing

Jeff Lewis


I don't know about swabbies but there is at least one COASTIE in the group (Someone has to be able to do the maritime safety check before we try and swim an M113)

_________________
Bob Smart (bsmart@xecu.net)


Last edited by bsmart on Sat Sep 08, 2007 9:14 am; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
Roy_A_Lingle
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 1997
Location: El Paso & Ft Bliss, Texas
PostPosted: Sat Sep 08, 2007 5:13 am
Post subject: Re: Stryker MGS

Hello fellow CIA Agents and other folks!

To the TC of G71, super thanks for the overwatching support as I took some time out to get some much needed sleep. Well done Sir! That was some heavy duty intell reporting.

To Dontos, did I lose 50 cool points for talking about things with wings or was because I caught you off guard about the history of the F104 in Vietnam?

As for the subject of "swabbies". Well lets see, they have "V" things that are armored and are used to fight from. I would call those super heavy AFVs and therefor more than qualified to be members of this "multidiciplinary" CIA team.

Thanks for the backup G71! "Allons"
Sgt, Scouts Out1

P.S.
As the number ONE conducter of "Alertness Tests" to see if anyone is paying attention to my "flobs ups" I must say that someone has always been there to correct my misinformation so other members will get the correct facts. For all those times, I thank you all.

_________________
"You can never have too much reconnaissance."
General G.S. Patton Jr.
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    Reply to topic    Printer Friendly Page    Forum Index ›  AFV News Discussion Board
Page 1 of 1
All times are GMT - 6 Hours



Jump to:  


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum