Com-Central.net

You outdun me, Doug!

- MarkHolloway

You outdun me, Doug!

You inspired me, Mark.

I'll give ya'll Armor - but I have to say its kinda hard to argue that Knox was/is the "ole" or "only" home of Cavalry...

Neil

- Neil_Baumgardner

I'll give ya'll Armor - but I have to say its kinda hard to argue that Knox was/is the "ole" or "only" home of Cavalry...

Neil

Do I hear a Fort Riley fan?

- MarkHolloway

Garry, When you go to see the new museum please remember that arson is a felony!

LOL. Actually, arson is the furthest thing from my mind. I wouldn't want to do any damage to the vehicles that I have known for over 40 years.

Mark, Doug, good job on the photos.

I guess Ft. Benning will be able to put up a sign reading "Home of Infantry and Armor" one day.

Next year, May 30, 2009, is the 60th anniversary of the founding of the Patton Museum. Hopefully we will be able to make it the biggest and best show ever. If it happens, this may be the best time for everyone here to meet and tell tall tales and get sh!t-faced and, well, you know.

- MarkHolloway

- Neil_Baumgardner

I'll give ya'll Armor - but I have to say its kinda hard to argue that Knox was/is the "ole" or "only" home of Cavalry...

Neil

Do I hear a Fort Riley fan?

Never been there actually

Just pointing out that things do change over time... Heck, Fort Benning was even the home of armor at one time - albeit rather briefly... Fort Meade was too...

I have a number of reservations about the move of the armor center to Fort Benning - but they mostly have to do with whether there is enough training space... And I have a hard time seeing an Infantry BCT taking full advantage of 60+ years of tank range, etc infrastructure investments at Fort Knox... I have this vision of tank convoys heading up to Knox every so often to use the ranges because there's not enough space at Benning....

That, and a dose of skepticism over expected/forecast BRAC savings...

Neil

They will probably go to Fort Stewart's ranges. They have five tank/Bradley firing ranges. I don't know what tables they can fire there, but I doubt it is anymore than at Fort Knox.

Anyway, the days of long-range engagements are on the wane as far as command is concerned, IMHO.

- Garry_Redmon

They will probably go to Fort Stewart's ranges. They have five tank/Bradley firing ranges. I don't know what tables they can fire there, but I doubt it is anymore than at Fort Knox.

Anyway, the days of long-range engagements are on the wane as far as command is concerned, IMHO.

Knox doesn't have any seriously long ranges either. If anybody was sincere about space and manuver/long-range shooting in the capability of current armor equipment, they wouldn't be moving east, but west.

I find it hard to believe that one factor in this isn't about a display of control and the subordination of the role of the of infantry a few short decades ago in manuver warfare under what I'll call the "Depuy Doctrine". It's not just about BRAC.

Does "tanks are obsolete" sound familiar?

- JG300-Ascout

- Garry_Redmon

They will probably go to Fort Stewart's ranges. They have five tank/Bradley firing ranges. I don't know what tables they can fire there, but I doubt it is anymore than at Fort Knox.

Anyway, the days of long-range engagements are on the wane as far as command is concerned, IMHO.

Knox doesn't have any seriously long ranges either. If anybody was sincere about space and manuver/long-range shooting in the capability of current armor equipment, they wouldn't be moving east, but west.

I find it hard to believe that one factor in this isn't about a display of control and the subordination of the role of the of infantry a few short decades ago in manuver warfare under what I'll call the "Depuy Doctrine". It's not just about BRAC.

Does "tanks are obsolete" sound familiar?

I don't know how Knox, Stewart and Benning compare in ranges. I believe that Knox has more infrastructure for tank warfare training. It seems that our theater of operations for the near future is going to be hot, sandy and rocky. As you said, West makes more sense. It seems that moving the Infantry and Armor schools along with their museums to Ft. Hood would be the answer

I think that there will always be a place for some type of fully-tracked AFV with a large weapon in the future until hover tanks are perfected.

- Garry_Redmon

- JG300-Ascout

- Garry_Redmon

They will probably go to Fort Stewart's ranges. They have five tank/Bradley firing ranges. I don't know what tables they can fire there, but I doubt it is anymore than at Fort Knox.

Anyway, the days of long-range engagements are on the wane as far as command is concerned, IMHO.

Knox doesn't have any seriously long ranges either. If anybody was sincere about space and manuver/long-range shooting in the capability of current armor equipment, they wouldn't be moving east, but west.

I find it hard to believe that one factor in this isn't about a display of control and the subordination of the role of the of infantry a few short decades ago in manuver warfare under what I'll call the "Depuy Doctrine". It's not just about BRAC.

Does "tanks are obsolete" sound familiar?

I don't know how Knox, Stewart and Benning compare in ranges. I believe that Knox has more infrastructure for tank warfare training. It seems that our theater of operations for the near future is going to be hot, sandy and rocky. As you said, West makes more sense. It seems that moving the Infantry and Armor schools along with their museums to Ft. Hood would be the answer

I think that there will always be a place for some type of fully-tracked AFV with a large weapon in the future until hover tanks are perfected.

Well, it's been over three decades, but I've shot most every range Knox had to offer in three tank calibers and there wasn't much opportunity beyond 2,000 meters, which at the time, was sufficient. Given that the max range of the 120mm Rheinmetal gun is twice that, well, you can draw your own conclusions. Knox Gunnery Ranges may have been improved, but not that much (I've been watching on Google Earth). Knox was a training ground for war in Europe with thirty-year old weapons. If you want training grounds to match the capability, you certainly don't move to the pine forests of Georgia. And that totally disregards the manuver element working with Bradleys and other elements. This sounds more about "how do we put a leash on the tanks" than "how can we maximize their potential in whatever conflict might arise in the future?"

You either stay were you were, or go looking for more open ground suitable for faster vehicles with longer range weapons. Benning ain't it, unless you have something else in mind for those vehicles.

You forget about the lag time in the decision process. When this round of BRAC started and the Army had to look ahead to where they would be involved what were they looking at? It wasn't the rocky mountains of Afganistan or the open spaces and cities of Iraq. It was the Balkans. we were well into the quagmire of disintigrating countries where ethnic minotities were coming out from under heavy fisted political structures. The army was dealing with using combined arms teams in areas with marginal infrastructure and deploying heavy equipment into areas that didn't have the roads and infrastructure to support it (Remember the media stories about how long it took to move some heavy units into the theater and how the vehicles were too large and heavy to be used in the 500 year old towns.

On top of that I think the Army saw a chance in many cases of throwing out the infrastructure that had been built for the previous century and starting over. This is more apparent in teh Ft Lee decision than in teh Ft Benning desision. If teh Army was going to combine Transportation, Quartermaster and Ordnance into a single 'Combat Support' structure why would you not place it at one of the two of the large existing schools and instead put it at a base that had been slowly shrinking over the last 25 or so years. The main reason is because it then gives you the chance to design the infrastructure to meet your concept of the future. You get all new facilities and a big piece of the justification is that this 'independent, non political oversight group (BRAC)' told you that it was the best thing to do. But I digress

The main thing to remember is that all the planning, the briefings by the Armed Forces, and most of the decisions about BRAC were made before the 'War on Terror' chnaged the game. But no one has had the gumption to say 'the world has changed BRAC no longer applies'

I wonder what 'Brac' Obama will do as president? (Sorry )