Korto wrote:Archinist, please don't fuck this up.
Now I know sweet eff-all about military shit, but I'm going to have a little go at this, and see what others agree with.
First off,
the vehicle itself is so inexpensive that a normal civilian could easily purchase 100's of them and still live in comfort.
What the fuck are we talking about here? Match-box cars? What "normal civilian" can afford to buy hundreds of frigging utes and 4 wheel drives!?
Anyway, I'll ignore that, as a
government could certainly afford a fleet of hundreds, or indeed thousands, of light vehicles.
The average second-hand 4X4 ute thingy costs around $1,000 to purchase, while the "average" wealthy citizen (not the official average probably) might have around 3-5 million dollars, so if they really wanted to, they could purchase a few thousand of them, depending on how many cars actually are being sold at that price.
Your plan is to hide a group of five hundred plus light vehicles, and a hundred armoured vehicles on open flat ground and behind a hill.
First, and most important question. HOW THE FUCK DID THEY GET THERE WITHOUT BEING SEEN? Five hundred plus vehicles, open terrain, all massed together? They'll be seen by aerial surveilance, satelite surveilance, intercepted radio (even if they can't decode it, they can still be interested in where it's coming from), and probably a bunch of other. Then they're going to fly some planes over the top, and drop a whole lot of cluster bombs, which you have conveniently all packed together for (or many, many, other alternatives. Mostly involving artillery. Arcing right over the top of your stupid hill).
Well, they could plan ahead and know that there is a pretty good chance of the enemy moving it's people there sometime and then slowly move some technicals there, not all at once, but instead just trickle their technicals there over time. While this is happening, the jeeps could be covered with a desert-coloured blanket which will look like normal desert sandy dunes when viewed from above so no one will get suspicious. While the men are waiting for the enemy to arrive, they would obviously have all their vehicle motors switched off, and no will will suspect a thing.
They will only use their radio rarely, everything else could be covered by word of mouth.
...the enemy would only lose a bunch of missiles, launchers and a few jeeps with some mostly untrained men driving them.
You know, those untrained men are pulling off a pretty impressive-sounding maneuver. One that would seem to require an awful lot of coordination and training.
Well, all they need to do is follow orders. There could be 1 instructor vehicle with signal lights and other things per 20 jeeps or so, plus all the officers that would organize the mission to start with.
How would a convoy of only MBTs (no supporting LAVs or lighter vehicles) defend themselves against a scenario like this:
I've decided to stop here, as the scenario has made me tired. I will just say, they would deal with this situation by not getting into it in the first place. Combined forces are a thing. AERIAL RECONNAISSANCE IS A THING.
[/quote]
Artillery wouldn't be all that useful once the jeeps have already started firing, as a good chunk of the armour convoy would have already been destroyed, plus the artillery would take a long time to actually see where the fire was coming from, a long time to react, and by the time it can actually do anything useful it's probably been destroyed or the convoy is gone anyway, at which point the technicals could just retreat to somewhere safe.
As for air support, how effective are air units against fast-moving technicals anyway? I remember a video where a gunship was firing at a technical on the ground, and it seemed to use up a vast amount of ammunition for just one car, plus I don't know, but wouldn't some shoulder-fired rockets make it quite dangerous for helicopters?
bilateralrope wrote:Archinist wrote:But the technicals are also much cheaper to produce and maintain, since the only thing that means anything will be the mounted weapon and the ammunition, the vehicle itself is so inexpensive that a normal civilian could easily purchase 100's of them and still live in comfort.
I own a cheap car. One that is of surprisingly good quality given its price. It cost me $500. What kind of normal civilian has $50,000 that they can easily spend ?
Don't most people have around that much money? I mean, a half-decent house costs around $400,000, and there are many many people who own more expensive houses than that. Plus there are even "common" cars such as brand-new toyota cruisers, nissans, ford sedans, etc which cost around $60,000 - $90,000. These are relatively common and you see them driving around in small towns quite often.
Plus however much the armaments cost. I know nothing about pricing weaponry so I won't guess.
Since the technicals are very fast and nimble
My car isn't. I doubt any down at that price range are. Then there is the matter of reliability.
[/quote]
If one breaks down, they can always be towed by another, or replaced by other cars. Anyway, I am pretty sure that the government should be able to have very bare-bones basic engines attached to wheels produced at a very low cost which are reliable. I mean a brand-new sedan costs around $15,000 today, and that is with all the unnecessary features such as wifi, A/C, crumple zones, airbags, windows, etc.