Field/Garrison
- Thread starter Long in the tooth
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 309
- Points
- 880
Lol, I would hardly call the Coyote a viable platform for Mud Recce. Ever since the loss of the Lynx, the RegF mud recce element has lost a few key ingredients for conducting survivable "sneak and peak". Perhaps with the advent of a new LUVW this will change. Don‘t get me wrong, they know how to do it, but is the equipment ideal, not really. That being said, the Reserves mud recce vehicle is small, quiet and fast, but has a survivability factor of about 7 seconds (or has that been downgraded to 5 secs??). Here‘s hoping whatever is chosen as LUVW replacement will fix these shortcomings. If you really are interested in this topic, check out the thread in the Armour Forum.
S
Sharpey
Guest
Recce41...with the tanks going West, this leaves only one Full Tank regiment now doesn‘t it?
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Now, I know I am about to bring up special forces, but hear me out...
The Brits (SAS) used the long wheel-based Land Rover, no roof, no doors, with much success in recce & strike mobility patrols deep behind the lines in Iraq in 1991. I wouldn‘t give a Land Rover more than a few seconds in a battle involving tanks or anti-armour missiles, and I doubt the SAS did either. It all depends on how the hardware is used, I would surmise.
I was shocked, as any civilian would be, when I learned the QYR‘s idea of "armoured recce" was driving an Iltis around with a cam net and building OPs. Now, after a bit of reading and talking to people in the unit and elsewhere, it begins to make a little sense. Sure, armour is great, but if you need it to protect your skin, you‘re in the sh*t anyway, and you might as well have something easier to conceal or quicker to haul a$$.
Just my not-yet-BMQ/SQ‘d PTE(R) 2 cents.
The Brits (SAS) used the long wheel-based Land Rover, no roof, no doors, with much success in recce & strike mobility patrols deep behind the lines in Iraq in 1991. I wouldn‘t give a Land Rover more than a few seconds in a battle involving tanks or anti-armour missiles, and I doubt the SAS did either. It all depends on how the hardware is used, I would surmise.
I was shocked, as any civilian would be, when I learned the QYR‘s idea of "armoured recce" was driving an Iltis around with a cam net and building OPs. Now, after a bit of reading and talking to people in the unit and elsewhere, it begins to make a little sense. Sure, armour is great, but if you need it to protect your skin, you‘re in the sh*t anyway, and you might as well have something easier to conceal or quicker to haul a$$.
Just my not-yet-BMQ/SQ‘d PTE(R) 2 cents.
Similar threads
