|
Community Links |
Social Groups |
Pictures & Albums |
Members List |
Search Forums |
Advanced Search |
Go to Page... |
View Poll Results: Has your opinion of the MAULER changed after reading aobut the real one? | |||
Yes, Favorable | 84 | 57.53% | |
No | 37 | 25.34% | |
Yes, Unfavorable | 2 | 1.37% | |
Don't care. | 23 | 15.75% | |
Voters: 146. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools |
03-12-2009, 12:25 AM | #1 |
Crimson Guard
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Albany NY
Posts: 1,440
|
In an earlier thread I mentioned how surprised I was to find out how many GI JOE toys were actualy based closely on REAL guns and vehicles... Well I finaly found the picture of the REAL MAULER TANK that was a test vehicle in the 1980s:
This info can be found in the book: "Modern TANKS" by George Forty The book has a black & white photo of the prototype that the MAULER Tank was based on. Its nearly exact in every detail! its on page 55 called the "High Survivability Test Vehicle (lightweight)". It said that either man seated in the front could drive, with the commander seated in the turret. It sported a Hypervelocity 75mm main gun and a camera mounted on the rear to see behind it! It was really fast at 51.5 mph and has armor up to 2.95 inches. It was built in 1980 to try and make a air dropable light-medium tank for the airborne divisions. It was supposed to replace the aging Sheriden light tank, which was retired from service in 1997. The extra low sloped turret would have made it very hard to spot or hit. Also at just 20 tons it could be flown in even by a C-130 cargo plane! According to some other articles I've found on the internet from real service men, they could REALLY use a vehicle like this that can arrive on the battle feild FAST and in LARGE numbers. The article goes on to say that our M1A1 Abrams is good but requires strong bridges and cannot be air dropped to meet the enemy quickly where they are! However a vehicle like this could do that. It also massivly adds to the firepower the Airborne units could bring to bear on the enemy. I guess GI JOE has it all over our REAL army in true Rapid Response capablilities. Kind of sad really when you think about it! Anyway here is a picture from the book:
__________________
PLease! I need your help to find; LOOSE: 1. Comic Pack October Guard Figures. 2. 1987 Cobra Maggot 3. Cobra Adder 4. Cobra Imp 5. Cobra Bunker parts or complete 6. Cobra Rifle Range parts or complete 7. Loose Pit Commandos, complete or not 8. Loose 25th greenshirts, complete or not Last edited by IronMan76; 03-12-2009 at 12:48 AM.. |
03-12-2009, 12:29 AM | #2 |
Win, Lose or Die
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Canton, Michigan
Posts: 9,661
|
Cool!
__________________
Cobra has won. The Battle is over. Or is it? The Reign of Tears has begun! Check out my original G.I.Joe story!
|
03-12-2009, 12:30 AM | #3 |
Hisstank.Com General
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Ga.
Posts: 6,091
|
yea very cool
__________________
----------------------------------------------- Tracker's Feedback Tracker's Dios on Joedios |
03-12-2009, 12:50 AM | #4 |
Crimson Guard
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Albany NY
Posts: 1,440
|
Sorry if I'm a little amped, but I just love to find out stuff on tanks. Especialy when it relates to GI JOE. I used to think that The MAULER was based on the early M1 Abrams Main Battle Tank, but its clearly not. And in fact its a really cool vehicle in its own right!
__________________
PLease! I need your help to find; LOOSE: 1. Comic Pack October Guard Figures. 2. 1987 Cobra Maggot 3. Cobra Adder 4. Cobra Imp 5. Cobra Bunker parts or complete 6. Cobra Rifle Range parts or complete 7. Loose Pit Commandos, complete or not 8. Loose 25th greenshirts, complete or not |
03-12-2009, 02:17 AM | #5 |
Always watching
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: California
Posts: 3,486
|
Ahh.. now I don't feel so bad when i see my poor Maulers being dwarfed by the Abrams.. they are not competitors for the throne of MBT anymore!
Can you find any more specs about this? Weight? Size? Etc. I'd love to work my Maulers into my Airborne teams correctly. I always thought the Mauler was one of the better looking Joe vehicles.. and it's awesome to see it was based on reality!
__________________
--- Check out! --- >>> The Fighting 1:18th! <<< --- The place for 1:18 fans to BS without BS. --- --- Enlist Today! --- >>> 9th SFG(A) Updates! <<< |
03-12-2009, 03:06 AM | #6 |
Crimson Guard
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Northeastern, Pennsylvania
Posts: 3,998
|
The heavy bulky tanks we have now in our real military are borderline outdated because of the way contemporary "war" is fought...a cross between close quarters urban combat, and LRRP seems to be the two defining ways ground battle is waged now, with no real in between areas of engagement, like rivers, jungles, forests, and whatnot...
...smaller, lighter, faster rapid response tanks, for ground support, that don't skimp on armor and firepower would be perfect for today's ground forces. A small modern tank is needed that's more heavily armored than a Hummer, but not as heavy and bulky as the tanks the military uses now. A tank that can take corners in urban areas quickly and nimbly, fit in alleyways and traverse small roads and bridges, but also take an RPG hit like a bigger tank, from a roof-top to ground type range. The tank would also need to haul ass to cover ground from background support, to front line weaponry without spending too much fuel to be ineffective when it reaches it's destination as it would run dry on gas too quickly to be used as an insertion vehicle and an evacuation vehicle. But than again, that's what the Apache helicopter is for. But to support the Apache, and other helicopters, a small scale super tough tank with super mobility and firepower would fit in a slot that I think is relatively vacant within armored divisions right now. Last edited by MLos1; 03-12-2009 at 03:09 AM.. |
03-12-2009, 08:56 AM | #7 |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Richmond, Virginia
Posts: 2,691
|
Quote:
The heavy bulky tanks we have now in our real military are borderline outdated because of the way contemporary "war" is fought...a cross between close quarters urban combat, and LRRP seems to be the two defining ways ground battle is waged now, with no real in between areas of engagement, like rivers, jungles, forests, and whatnot...
...smaller, lighter, faster rapid response tanks, for ground support, that don't skimp on armor and firepower would be perfect for today's ground forces. A small modern tank is needed that's more heavily armored than a Hummer, but not as heavy and bulky as the tanks the military uses now. A tank that can take corners in urban areas quickly and nimbly, fit in alleyways and traverse small roads and bridges, but also take an RPG hit like a bigger tank, from a roof-top to ground type range. The tank would also need to haul ass to cover ground from background support, to front line weaponry without spending too much fuel to be ineffective when it reaches it's destination as it would run dry on gas too quickly to be used as an insertion vehicle and an evacuation vehicle. But than again, that's what the Apache helicopter is for. But to support the Apache, and other helicopters, a small scale super tough tank with super mobility and firepower would fit in a slot that I think is relatively vacant within armored divisions right now. The problem is that it is very, very expensive to replace all the massive cold war era machines and they are already in trouble before the new administration takes away even more funding. It is a bit of a pie in the sky. They want the moon on a shoestring budget. Considering this has been ongoing for many years and is barely in the prototype stage is indicitive that we will be using interim fixes for the forseeable. Here's the current answer (The Interim Armored Vehicle "Styker" and its variants): |
thunderdan19 |
View Public Profile |
Find More Posts by thunderdan19 |
03-12-2009, 11:53 AM | #8 |
Crimson Guard
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Denmark & USA
Posts: 4,966
|
Here are just a few. Even the PAC-RATS are real if you look them up. I am too tired to name them all.
M.O.B.A.T. = M-551 Sheridan Light Attack Tank R.A.M. = 1981 Honda CBX: V.A.M.P. = Lamborghini Cheetah: F.L.A.K. = 10.5 cm FlaK 38 H.A.L. = M198 155mm Towed Howetzer J.U.M.P. = Bell Rocket Belt M.M.S. = MIM-23 Hawk APC = M-93 Fox Dragonfly XH-1 = Bell Textron AH-1 Cobra F.A.N.G. = Benson Gyrocopter USS Flagg (CVN68 Nimitz Class) Toss ‘n Cross (M60A1 Bridgelayer Tank) Sky Striker (F14A Tomcat) Warthog (LVT7 USMC Landing Vehicle) A.W.E. Striker (Chenowith Fast Attack Vehicle) Cobra Rattler (A-10 Thunderbolt) Cobra Night Raven (SR71 Blackbird) Last edited by Starfighter; 03-12-2009 at 11:57 AM.. |
03-12-2009, 12:03 PM | #9 |
Cobra Viper
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Prescott, WI
Posts: 121
|
Thanks for the info.
Very cool. |
03-12-2009, 12:14 PM | #10 |
Good times abound.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Scott AFB, IL.
Posts: 1,339
|
The Stryker is a bit of a joke. They cost millions to build and field, only to need upgrades and changes to each environment after wards. Wheeled vehicles aren't the way of the future. Tires are meant for roads, not for all terrains that are neccessary for the military to traverse. We need tracked vehicles with upped armor. There is a campaign to get M113s out of storage and upgrade them for pennies on the dollar compared to the Stryker program.
Our main issue right now is a light vehicle that can be air dropped. That is where countries like Russia completely outshine us. Russia moves FAST when they attack because of their huge list of air drop capable vehicles. The conflict in Georgia surprised everyone with how fast and swiftly Russia destroyed an equally equipped and trained force.
__________________
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Real Life Hiss Tank? | Dunklar | G.I. Joe General Discussion | 71 | 08-13-2011 12:53 AM |
Mauler? | Honasty | G.I. Joe Buy Sell Trade | 14 | 01-29-2009 12:35 PM |
mobat/mauler | crock master | G.I. Joe Toys Vintage Discussion | 4 | 11-25-2008 07:10 PM |
mauler | generalhawk | G.I. Joe Buy Sell Trade | 1 | 10-22-2008 09:42 PM |
|
|