Article

2005-09-09 Home Front: Tech

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve 2005-09-09 09:56|| || Front Page|| [1 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 I've always wondered if it would be possible for an enemy to destroy the pre-positioned equipment in a theatre, thus diminishing the combat power of the US forces that were supposed to use the equipment on arrival in-theatre. Wouldn't the troops have to hold out with what they brought along until a new equipment set arrived? Imagine, for example, North Korean special forces destroying the equipment set for a BCT that is designated to arrive in South Korea just after an invasion.

Posted by Jonathan">Jonathan 2005-09-09 10:25|| 2005-09-09 10:25|| Front Page Top

#2 The pre-positioned supplies could be destroyed, sure. Then the US would be forced to divert the troops coming in to another location until replacements could be found.

I can't imagine anyone would send the troops into a fight if the equipment wasn't there.

Posted by Robert Crawford">Robert Crawford 2005-09-09 11:01|| http://www.kloognome.com/]">[http://www.kloognome.com/] 2005-09-09 11:01|| Front Page Top

#3 Destruction isn't as easy as all that. The US is quite good, as these things go, in storing materiel so as to minimize destruction by fire or explosion. (Even a properly arranged company motor pool has five or six different safety points for storing apart things like compressed gasses, paints, oils and greases, etc.)

Vehicles are not fueled and are motor parked, so how do you destroy a bunch of big piles of steel? Munitions are stored in seperate bunkers and away from weapons. POL is the easiest to destroy, but it is expended so quickly that it is never taken for granted under any event. (Note: it is almost comic to ask for directions at a POL storage point during a high alert. They get downright testy.)

Within a storage area are lots of internal fences, which could slow down a saboteur a LOT. And these places also have armed security personnel who are quick with a radio to call for back-up.

Pre-positioning has been around for a while.

Posted by Anonymoose 2005-09-09 12:25|| 2005-09-09 12:25|| Front Page Top

#4 an enemy destroying pre-positioned equiptment would be an air force general's dream - bomb's away from altitude

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2005-09-09 12:49|| 2005-09-09 12:49|| Front Page Top

#5 I recall the Soviets were going to use persistent nerve agents.

Posted by Shipman 2005-09-09 14:39|| 2005-09-09 14:39|| Front Page Top

#6 Ah, but that's a different style of conflict. If an enemy has such air superiority, or can willfully drop a missile on your pre-positioned equipment, then sending a combat brigade forward is moot anyway.

There will be combat brigades, no doubt, that *do* take their own equipment along, just for such an eventuality, such as airborne brigades.

Remember that pre-positioning should not be seen as vital, it should be seen as a convenience.

Posted by Anonymoose 2005-09-09 16:35|| 2005-09-09 16:35|| Front Page Top

23:47 Cheaderhead
23:44 Captain America
23:43 AJackson
23:43 ed
23:42 ed
23:39 OldSpook
23:37 IT Insider
23:35 Bomb-a-rama
23:35 Jan
23:35 ed
23:28 Jan
23:28 Tony
23:26 Bomb-a-rama
23:22 Alaska Paul
23:08 Alaska Paul
22:59 JosephMendiola
22:45 Phil Fraering
22:36 DanNY
22:34 Rafael
22:20 JosephMendiola
22:14 AJackson
22:11 Alaska Paul
22:08 Alaska Paul
22:00 JosephMendiola