Originally Posted by
Paper
Yes, but rifles are rather essential to a soldier. This isn't. The easiest comparison I can think of to this (In terms of cost-> effectiveness) is the V-22. The MH-53 could do it's job just fine, but the V-22 could do it a bit faster and at longer ranges. Is that really a good enough reason to spend loads of money developing (modifying in this case) something new to implement?
If the payoff is worth it, yes. MOBILITY IS ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL TO A SOLDIER. If it allows frontline infantry groups to mass on targets in a matter of minutes instead of hours, that's a dynamic enough change to warrant it. Sticks, even control sticks, are simple and highly developed. They are not an argument against use and your attitude against a control stick is absurd. No matter what alternative you come up with for control, it will always come down to a stick or wheel.
There is a huge difference between this and the V-22: this has no significant comparable technology. THAT competes for a job already filled, this fills a need that remains unaddressed.
Two of my best buddies are former 82nd AB, this would be absolutely beautiful for AB divisions to improve mobility. Call it a "Mobility Implement" if you would, as a distinction from the idea that it's a fighting vehicle. (It couldn't be.) You could make a drop with this thing in your personal kit. Even motorcycles are too big for that.
"But it's just a game."
"So's blackjack. Go cheat in a Moscow casino and when you get caught tell the mobsters it's just a game. They have great sense of humor, you'll have a fun story to tell your future children. Who will have to be adopted, after the little prank the mob does to you in return."
Register To Reply
