US Marines Criticized For Growler Contract

Discussion in 'Weapons, Equipment & Rations' started by starkweatherr, Dec 29, 2005.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. This is another sad example of Marine Corps thinking. Remember their current motto: "230 years of tradition undisturbed by progress." I'm so proud to see that my beloved Marine Corps will never change. Remember that they were the only purchasers of the M-103 Heavy Tank. An amphibious force with a tank that couldn't be transported on anything except a cargo ship makes a lot of sense when you think about it. Two piece 120mm round not used by any other US AFV, you get the idea.

    Actually, there is something else about this that may be indicative of a much more serious problem. Notice they say that the Growler needs to be modified to fit into an OV-22? Now I may be more paranoid than I think, but I seem to remember, in 1984, being able to load two M-151s into a CH-53D without any preparation other than folding up the troops seats in the helo. If an M-151 needs to be modified to fit into an V-22, does that mean that the Osprey's cargo compartment is significantly different from the CH-53's? If so, what other equipment will need to be modified to fit. Remember that the CH-53 cargo compartment was dsigned around the vehicles/cargo it would need to carry.
  2. Maybe we should sell them some panther's? At £413,000 then they'd REALY complain...
  3. Umm. No, US Army bought the M103s first. They then very quickly decided that it was a waste, and gave them to the USMC.

    Looking at pictures of the thing, it even looks like a stripped down M151. I seriously doubt it's worth two HMMWVs.

  4. Phew! I thought this thread was about US Marines getting the contract for NAAFI pies!
  5. i think the contract incules big 120mm towed mortars and ammo and stuff so may not actually be all the pricey
    although building the humvee that can't be airlifted by any helo is funny. us rangers ended up buying landys
  7. At least they do get new kit....Shame v-22 is about 20 years late!
  8. They could always take the approach the Russians did with the Mi-26 Halo - build a helicopter which can carry what a C-130 can.
  9. No way! They've seriously called this thing "Growler"?

    We should buy some. Then we could use them with our Snatch.
  10. I've often wondered. Is it nicknamed "snatch" cos it f**ks you up, is slightly battered and smells?
  11. V-22: currently near the top of my list of "Aircraft nothing short of an Extraordinary Rendition would get me aboard", duking it out with the Tu-134 and the Aztruck. There's just too much stuff to go wrong in a catastrophically final way...mind you, imagine if we'd finished the Fairey Gyrodyne. Now that would have been a capability (even though it was almost as scary).

    There is a nasty look of "we've got this incredibly expensive wiggly heliflopterplanethingy at, we'd damn well better find a use for it!" about this. And does anyone else have the suspicion that "Sea-to-Objective Manoeuvre" involves targets about 110 miles from the sea because that's the radius of action of a V22?
  12. No way! They've seriously called this thing "Growler"?

    I say! Do you mind!
  13. No offence intended.

    But the way things are going we seem to be a short step away from christening MRAV "Vag" or FRES "Minge" when they come in to service. What are the chances of Panther being officially shortened to "Pussy"? :p
  14. Growlers!

    someone in defense procurement is making a packet again!

    Do you reckon Bowler would fiddle with our landrovers for the same price?
  15. The current LR is a couple of inches too wide, but I reckon the Lightweight would fit the bill perfectly.

    Do you want to tell the USMC or shall I :lol: