john g
Posts: 984
Joined: 10/6/2000 From: college station, tx usa Status: offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Drake:
I dont know from were you got your info but from what I have read the German army had a very good repair system along with the best machanics. Now the red army was the compleat opposent and thats what it sound like you are tolking about.
[This message has been edited by Drake (edited November 22, 2000).]
I too have seen mention of German equipment breakdowns. When they entered Slovakia, didn't they have quite a few of the vehicles break down, and that was just a victory ride, they weren't getting shot at.
Years ago I read that the mtbf (mean time between failures, roughly how long you could expect something to work) for the US M551 was 50 miles. They would break down if used at all.
Another example, between WWI and WWII the US army did a test to determine what sort of transport was the best for the future, the compared the distance a unit of horse cavalry, truck carried infantry and bicycle riding infantry could travel in a set period of time (quite a few days). As it turned out the bicycle infantry covered the furthest distance. The trucks spent so much time broken down they couldn't cover more ground than bicycles. The cavalry covered less distance because they had to feed, water, saddle and unsaddle, etc their horses.
Now as we know the US didn't enter WWII with bicycle divisions, because the trucks became more dependable as they went along, but vehicles of the 30's and 40's were junk compared with what we drive today. Don't assume since you can drive your car thousands of miles between service, that a vehicle back then could do the same.
thanks, John.
_____________________________
|