dEdDaWg
Feb 28 2005, 04:15 AM
QUOTE (tisoz) |
What is the length of duty for those countries with a conscription? I saw 10 months for Germany and maybe 9 months... |
It's 2-1/2 years in Singapore - one would go to the army, navy, airforce, police force or one of the civil defence groups (paramedics, firefighters, etc).
Derek
Feb 28 2005, 05:01 AM
USMC, 15 years now.
12 years enlisted, signals intel type
3 years officer, intelligence officer
And yes, there is a such thing as military intelligence.
Been a lot of places, including Iraq, more than once, and going back again soon.
Semper Fi
Derek
The Grifter
Feb 28 2005, 05:20 AM
Semper Fi, you salt dog you. LOL
KillaJ
Feb 28 2005, 05:18 AM
There should be a "Yes. But I'm out now and they will have to drag me kicking and screaming to get me back into uniform." option. Or was that implied...?
19K. Wonder what it is about tanks that draws the SR crowd?
The Grifter
Feb 28 2005, 05:27 AM
Ah, if you've done time already you already know that is implied. And to put it it quite simply, something down at the heart of all men loves tanks. Giant Engines and giant guns in one package.
SirKodiak
Feb 28 2005, 07:15 AM
QUOTE |
Wonder what it is about tanks that draws the SR crowd? |
How could you not love something with such a high target number to soak the damage?
Paul
Feb 28 2005, 07:38 AM
QUOTE (Derek) |
USMC, 15 years now.
12 years enlisted, signals intel type 3 years officer, intelligence officer
And yes, there is a such thing as military intelligence.
Been a lot of places, including Iraq, more than once, and going back again soon.
Semper Fi Derek |
I didn't know you were an officer.
4 years USMC-0311 baby. ot myhonorable and missed it ever since.
toturi
Feb 28 2005, 07:55 AM
QUOTE (dEdDaWg @ Feb 28 2005, 12:15 PM) |
QUOTE (tisoz) | What is the length of duty for those countries with a conscription? I saw 10 months for Germany and maybe 9 months... |
It's 2-1/2 years in Singapore - one would go to the army, navy, airforce, police force or one of the civil defence groups (paramedics, firefighters, etc).
|
It is only 2 years now. It was 2 1/2 years for those with Diploma/GCE A level or higher qualifications.
Damn pussies can't take another 1/2 yr of military life it seems.
Omer Joel
Feb 28 2005, 09:54 AM
QUOTE (tisoz @ Feb 28 2005, 02:07 AM) |
What is the length of duty for those countries with a conscription? I saw 10 months for Germany and maybe 9 months... |
3 years in today's Israel... Or about 2 years if you're a woman and you have a non-combative position (women in combative branches serve the full 3 years). Conscription is mandatory for both genders, too. Conscripts get 300-900 NIS (around 65-200 US$) per month, depending on branch of service and risk factor, as a "salary"/allowance, and usually aren't permitted to work during vacations, and this is one of the main issues among soldiers (especially in the current economical depression).
I wasn't conscripted due to medical issues (severe alergies, among other things); most of my friends were, or are about to.
FrostyNSO
Feb 28 2005, 10:20 AM
Wow, lots of marines on the board. I prolly delivered a pizza to Derek when he was a young devil dog and I was still in high school. You spend any time at Pendelton?
QUOTE |
Never joined. My cousins and I are kind of the first generation in my family that no one has served. All of my uncles, Father, grand fathers, grand uncles, they were all in the military. After 9-11, I had mulled it over a loooong time. I talked to everyone in my fam that had been in the military or had been to war. The tough thing for me is that I had just gotten married a little more than a year before and had a great new job that payed what I wanted. That made it tough. That's why I give major props to anybody that makes the financial and family sacrifice to serve. Yeah, you put your life on the line for all of us, but it's your families that also sacrifice a bit as well. In the end I couldn't do that. My uncle, who got drafted into Vietnam, just told me this, "if Uncle Sam needs you, you best believe he'll come knockin." l A side note, one of my players was a marine in Desert Storm, great guy. Started roleplaying in the military. So all you Kick Ass Defenders of Liberty, I hope you find a bit of enjoyment in the Blessed Game of Shadowrun. |
I had this same struggle. My grandpa did 15 years in the Foreign Legion and my pop did 10 + 4 (same four as me
). I wasn't sure what to do after high school and I had a great girlfriend of 2 years at the time. After looking into law enforcment and the Air Force, and talking to my dad about it, it became really clear that he wanted to see me follow in his footsteps. He told me: "Every man needs to cut ties once in his lifetime and do something truely extraordinary." Those words stuck with me for months until it was drivng me mad. So, after a particularly bad day at work, I took my final paycheck (that should explain it right there), said goodbye to my girl, and bought a one-way plane ticket (with layovers in Boston and New York, mind you) to Paris and signed up. Looking back, It was one of the best things i could've done for myself, and like any man (or woman) who serves, it is something special that nobody can ever take away from you. My only regret is leaving my girlfriend. She was absolutely amazing, and I never have heard from her again, let alone even heard news of what she's doing.
As for the tank thing: I think I've always preferred being out in the elements. Moving through natural surroundings, being a part of them. Even in an urban jungle. To have your hands and your tools right on you. To dominate your environment. To do something that needs to be done with your own blood and skill. It's just a great feeling.
But I gotta say, seeing a tank flatten a VW is just
paradise!
PBTHHHHT
Feb 28 2005, 12:01 PM
QUOTE (FrostyNSO) |
Those words stuck with me for months until it was drivng me mad. So, after a particularly bad day at work, I took my final paycheck (that should explain it right there), said goodbye to my girl, and bought a one-way plane ticket (with layovers in Boston and New York, mind you) to Paris and signed up. |
Wow, I'm very impressed with that. To not only just get up and join the military, but to fight for another country too. Did you already know french before joining the legion or did you have to learn it after you joined?
Sometimes after a bad day at work, I've always wondered about joining the military, but I'll wait till after I'm done with school and pass the bar exam. See if I can get into JAG first and foremost.
Grinder
Feb 28 2005, 12:19 PM
At germany we had to chose between one year of service in the army or one year social service. I chose the social year, as the whole drill style of the army never was sth. i wanted
Turned out to be the best choice i've ever made, as my current job is in the same place where i spend my social year. And i had a very good time with a lot of sex, drugs and rock'n'roll during that year (and since then).
MYST1C
Feb 28 2005, 12:42 PM
QUOTE (Grinder) |
At germany we had to chose between one year of service in the army or one year social service. |
Today it's 9 months for military, 10 months for social service.
Military service can be voluntarily extended up to a total of 23 months. In that case you get higher pay but retain the conscript status - you can only be sent to missions in foreign countries if you want to, you don't have to pay taxes, get free train rides and various amenities in daily life (cheaper entrance to museums and other cultural events, etc.).
Grinder
Feb 28 2005, 01:17 PM
Its a while back since i've done my service
hermit
Feb 28 2005, 01:55 PM
QUOTE |
See if I can get into JAG first and foremost. |
Heh, I wonder if the combat part of their work is indeed as big as in that TV show ...
TheOneRonin
Feb 28 2005, 02:07 PM
US Army. 6 years as an 11M (dismount). Served from 1994 to 2000. Did every job from rifleman, SAW gunner, and Anti-Armor to team leader and platoon-bitch for our spoiled mounted guys. Unfortunately, Uncle Sam never saw fit to deploy me anywhere interesting. I spent all 6 @ Ft. Polk, LA. JRTC was a drag. Though I did manage to get in on one NTC rotation, which wasn't half bad. I ETSes with my five, and though I miss it sometimes, I'm glad I no longer have to sleep on the ground in the rain.
PBTHHHHT
Feb 28 2005, 02:14 PM
QUOTE (hermit) |
QUOTE | See if I can get into JAG first and foremost. |
Heh, I wonder if the combat part of their work is indeed as big as in that TV show ...
|
Hah. Don't get me started on that show.
Derek
Feb 28 2005, 02:28 PM
QUOTE (FrostyNSO) |
Wow, lots of marines on the board. I prolly delivered a pizza to Derek when he was a young devil dog and I was still in high school. You spend any time at Pendelton?
|
Never was stationed there, which is ironic, since I am from so-cal. Thats the Corps for you...
Forgot to mention that I have been gaming since a long long time ago, and shadowrunning since it came out. Doesn't make me a better gamer though
Paul, being an officer doesn't make me a bad person! Heh.
Derek
Reaver
Feb 28 2005, 03:10 PM
QUOTE (FrostyNSO) |
Just curious as to how many vets we have on Dumpshock. If you are a vet, chime in and list your MOS as well as any deployments. If you're signed up, or planning to, list what you will be doing or what you plan on doing.
I did 5 years in the Legion (3rd generation). Started out in infantry with the 3REI (jungle warfare unit) until being transferred the famous 2REP. I finished my 5 years there, picking up a host of certs and going to other schools while not deployed.
After that, I served in another French special operations unit outside the legion. Did 4 years there and then came home to the States.
Deployments (with the legion) include:
Republic of Congo (if they still call it that) Belgrade Mitrovica Wadi Seidna Les Andalouses
Chime In!
edit: And did you come into Shadowrun before, during, or after?
I played a tiny bit before in high school (like first edition or something), but when I got back some friends of mine got me hooked and I've never looked back. |
I was U.S. Naval Reserve for 8 years.
Hospital Corpsman and Field Medic.
Garland
Feb 28 2005, 03:11 PM
There needs to be a "No, but I'd sign up for 'The Big One.'" option.
psykotisk_overlegen
Feb 28 2005, 03:13 PM
Conscription time in Norway is a year, I think (ought to be sure now that I've been enlisted, but I'll get to know it soon enough anyway). It's mandatory if they want you, but it is possible to refuse on religious/moral grounds and take a year of social service instead.
U_Fester
Feb 28 2005, 03:34 PM
USN - CTT2
Persian Gulf War Vet(first time around)
Somalia
and other fun stuff
Pthgar
Feb 28 2005, 04:14 PM
First, thanks to all the vets whove served.
Graduating college in a few months. I plan to join the USMC, they'll have me. I'm going to have to get an age waiver.
Just Pete
Feb 28 2005, 05:17 PM
U.S.Army, 11 years, Oct 87 - Oct 98. Changed MOS's 3 times without actually changing jobs - was a comm center operator the whole time. Served in the SACEUR's comm center in Belgium during the first gulf war.
Got out as an E-5 after closing down most of the comm services on Ft. Ritchie right before it closed for good, after it became quite apparant that I would never make E-7, and probably not E-6, either, due to a busted up back, and simply not being part of the good 'ol boys network. Plus, they wanted me to go on recruiter duty. Not for me!
JTNLANGE
Feb 28 2005, 05:13 PM
U.S. Army
Desert Storm-first time around
Germany 2 years
Heavy Construction Equipment
The best 4 years of my life
got out as a spc4
Joined right out of High school
if i had to do all over again i wouldn't change a thing.
Trevor
Paul
Feb 28 2005, 06:05 PM
QUOTE (Derek) |
Paul, being an officer doesn't make me a bad person! Heh.
Derek |
Heh, I actually never was one of those zero haters, but then I had some good company and battalion level staff in my frist unit. I think it's cool you made the transistion.
FrostyNSO
Feb 28 2005, 07:21 PM
QUOTE (PBTHHHHT) |
Wow, I'm very impressed with that. To not only just get up and join the military, but to fight for another country too. Did you already know french before joining the legion or did you have to learn it after you joined? |
I had to pick it up during training. Learned a lot of it just by reading a french bible since I was fairly familiar with the scriptures.
Apathy
Feb 28 2005, 08:12 PM
Ex-tanker, with the US Army 5th ID and 2nd AD. Got out in '93.
BrazilRascal
Feb 28 2005, 10:50 PM
I'd love to join a branch of the military, especially here where we have such a cool element of jungle combat involved. But while I'd love to acquire the skills of a soldier, I have a BIG problem with being shipped off to some conflict I have nothing to do with, or to defer to unaccountable authority with a "Sir YES Sir!". The problem with remembering when you lived under a military dictatorship is tha tit sours you towards the whole institution, which is wrong but hard to get over. My loss, I know.
And since there are so many armor troopers here, one thing I'd like to ask: Lots of military texts and analysis I've been reading keeps insisting that the age of tank warfare is over, and that airplanes and specialized, elite small infantry teams with cutitng-edge gear are the future. I don't know enough to have a position on the matter, so some first-hand input would be great. I must admit that I'm pretty partial to tanks, though The new Abrahams and the experimental T-90 are such beautiful war machines....
Kagetenshi
Feb 28 2005, 10:54 PM
I disagree that it's wrong. I fully admit that it's the only effective way to run an armed force of any significance, but effectiveness redeems only so much.
~J
hermit
Mar 1 2005, 12:01 AM
QUOTE |
And since there are so many armor troopers here, one thing I'd like to ask: Lots of military texts and analysis I've been reading keeps insisting that the age of tank warfare is over, and that airplanes and specialized, elite small infantry teams with cutitng-edge gear are the future. I don't know enough to have a position on the matter, so some first-hand input would be great. I must admit that I'm pretty partial to tanks, though The new Abrahams and the experimental T-90 are such beautiful war machines.... |
The age of the tank as the be-all end-all of ground warfare are definitly over. a tank isn't any longer the highest end of the food chain of war machines.
But just as cuirassiers were around centuries after the era of knights ended, tanks still play a vital role in the world's armies, and will propably far into the future, albeit constantly upgraded and outfitted with the newest in technology.
For even if an AH-64, A-10, or really any decent war plane or helicopter, can dispose of a tank as easily as a tank can dispose of an infantrist, a tank is still the weapon of coice to occupy territorry, to lead ground forces, and to deal with infantry units.
Especially when the weather is too bad for planes or helicopters to be effective. As witnessed in the most recent Gulf War.
AIM-54
Mar 1 2005, 01:59 AM
A lot of people liked to write tanks and other modern weaponry off partially because low-intensity conflict was/is supposed to be the way of the future. OIF has, to some extent, proven this an incorrect assumption, as armor has played a vital role in the urban warfare there. Armored vehicles are simply too important and can't be replicated by other capabilities.
In terms of conventional warfare, I would argue that anti-tank weapons (whether infantry carried or in helicopter or aircraft form) have done nothing to make the tank less vital to ground warfare. They are the ultimate power in the ground battle, regardless of their vulnerabilities to air power. Ultimately, those vulnerabilities only emphasize the importance of combined-arms warfare, where your air assets protect your ground assets and destroy enemy air and ground assets.
The tank hasn't really been invulnerable since WWI and even then, they'd be as likely to overheat as make it through the trench line.
Nikoli
Mar 1 2005, 02:19 AM
Sad, no category for unable to serve.
Crimsondude 2.0
Mar 1 2005, 02:26 AM
QUOTE (AIM-54) |
They are the ultimate power in the ground battle, regardless of their vulnerabilities to air power. |
Unless the enemy force has no airpower. Then it's game-on.
AIM-54
Mar 1 2005, 02:46 AM
QUOTE (Crimsondude 2.0) |
Unless the enemy force has no airpower. Then it's game-on. |
I figured that went without saying.
Crimsondude 2.0
Mar 1 2005, 02:54 AM
Do not assume anything on DS.
AIM-54
Mar 1 2005, 03:06 AM
QUOTE (Crimsondude 2.0) |
Do not assume anything on DS. |
Fair enough.
Deamon_Knight
Mar 1 2005, 03:27 AM
Big Thanks To everyone who served, you guys make all the difference.
The Grifter
Mar 1 2005, 03:35 AM
Also, another important duty the tank fills is shock and awe. Nothing will scare crunchies more than seeing 65 tons of armored death spitting hell and flames coming at them. Nothing makes better track grese than enemy infantry.
BrazilRascal
Mar 1 2005, 05:39 AM
Thanks for everyone who replied to my inquiry on armor. It's very much appreciated. So the verdict is "overwhelming when dealing with non-air-supported forces, useful otherwise".
On the same note, I've read more (and from more credible sources) stuff daming the effectiveness of Armored Personal Carriers, like the bradley. Not about their offenive capabilities, but about them being too vulnerable to anti-tank weapons such as the RPG-7. Also, they claimed that the issue was because, if you add extra armor, it becomes too heavy and therefore slow; if you rely on lighter armor, it doesn't stop the blast and endagers the troops within. Some articles were complete with horror stories about how aluminum-based armor "spalled" and tore through the people inside.
Fact, fiction, or a freak accident being played up?
FlakJacket
Mar 1 2005, 07:11 AM
Not even considering air power, Javelin ATM's seem scary enough as it is. On Bradley's and anti-armour weapons, well when you consider that newer versions of the venerable RPG-7 like the 7VL can penetrate up to 500mm of reactive armour then it can be problematic.
Austere Emancipator
Mar 1 2005, 07:42 AM
Any vehicle other than a main battle tank is extremely vulnerable to any anti-armor weapons, and even armor steel can spall a lot when not spaced or lacking a backing material (though most armor designs these days incorporate one or both). The worst case scenario of aluminum armor is that it catches fire when hit by shaped charge explosives or incendiary weapons, though I am not sure exactly how (un-)likely that is. Suffice it to say, the US Army is rapidly getting rid of aluminum armor on its Bradleys and going for steel instead.
FlakJacket
Mar 1 2005, 08:35 AM
QUOTE (Austere Emancipator) |
The worst case scenario of aluminum armor is that it catches fire when hit by shaped charge explosives or incendiary weapons, though I am not sure exactly how (un-)likely that is. |
Hhmm, gotta love that toxic smoke and burning to the ground.
hermit
Mar 1 2005, 11:02 AM
For all I know, the Bradley is reasonably tough - yes, it's not invulnerable, but it is able to take one or two hits from your average 60s RPG-7 - the weapon a tank is bound to encounter on the battleflield these days. Yes, it won't just shrug that off like an Abrams, Centurion or Leopard 2 (presumably, as the latter hasn't seen combat yet), but it is not a front-line combat vehicle! Still, it has held itself for almost 50 years now, and still is the best APC the US has.
Critias
Mar 1 2005, 11:00 AM
I'm pretty sure I'd lose a fight against one.
hermit
Mar 1 2005, 11:27 AM
Heh, most likely, unless you'd be in urban terrain with an RPG on an elevated position (and best, had some friends in similar spots close by).
TheOneRonin
Mar 1 2005, 01:39 PM
I spent my entire military career operating with Bradleys. And in my experience, their biggest shortcomings have to do with doctrine, not with the Bradleys themselves. When they are used in their intended role (as transportation and fire support for Infantry), they work like a charm. On any day I'd rather have a Bradley pouring down 25mm fire on an enemy position than just have a couple of guys with M-60s trying to do the same thing. However, my unit's leadership honestly believed that Bradleys were designed to be primarily Anti-Armor, and liked to use them to engage enemy tanks.
Every lane we ran at NTC where we met up with enemy armor saw about a 70% casualty rate among our Bradleys. Instead of letting our attached Abrams Platoon deal with them, the CO decided the Bradleys should be out there killing armor. Totally bad idea.
Is the Bradley tough? Well, considering the majority of it will bouce most small arms fire (later model Bradleys vs. anything less than a .50 cal), yeah, I would say it's pretty tough. At least if it is only engaging Infantry. The minute you drop it in the boat with REAL armor, it's toast. Hell, my dismount squad armed with AT-4s is more of a threat to a platoon of tanks than a Bradley is.
And if it was up to me, I'd NEVER want to take a Bradley into a MOUT environment, period.
Austere Emancipator
Mar 1 2005, 02:03 PM
QUOTE (hermit) |
[...] but [the Bradley] is able to take one or two hits from your average 60s RPG-7 [...] |
That probably means the PG-7V original shaped charge rocket. If this rocket hits a reactive armor panel, or only delivers a glancing blow, the Bradley stands a good chance of not being harmed. A direct hit to a spot not protected by reactive armor, though, stands a very good chance of penetration, even to the angled front plate. In fact, I'd rather say penetration in that case is guaranteed. If the Bradley survives, that's most likely due to there being lots of "empty" space inside.
Actual armor ratings of most armored personnel carriers are really hard to get at, and the few figures you do find tend to be estimates. Still, I seriously doubt even the M2A3 Bradley gets close to the 260-330mm RHS required to defeat the PG-7V without reactive panels. Most likely the front plate, angle considered, is something like half that. And judging from the pictures and videos from Iraq, it doesn't seem like nearly all Bradleys are equipped with ERA.
I would personally not expect the Centurion able to "shrug off" RPG hits, seeing as how it has a steel hull no more than ~150mm thick, up to around 200mm in the later versions. Maybe you were thinking about the
Challenger 2?
hermit
Mar 1 2005, 02:25 PM
Erm, yeah, I guess I stand corrected.
PBTHHHHT
Mar 1 2005, 04:58 PM
How does the Israeli tank, the Merkerva, compare to the rest in terms of survivability? I read that the tank has a unique design where the engine block is placed in the forward portion rather than rear and this helped ensure the crew was protected from a frontal hit. That it also had a rear hatch in the back such that the tank could also accomodate a squad of troops if it had to.
I also heard they're planning to make an apc version of the tank removing the large turret with smaller one with machine guns instead. Something about the survivability using the tank hull for an apc, rather than buying any of the new strykers that were offered to them from by the US.