News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The Cannons on the B-29 Bomber by Tloewald on Wednesday December 02, 2015 @11:00AM (#10663705)
If my life were on the line I'd prefer not to be in combat, but if you're infantry, riding around in an Abrams isn't an option. It's like saying you'd prefer to be in a frigate.
Re:The Cannons on the B-29 Bomber by RogtamBar on Wednesday December 02, 2015 @11:16AM (#10663815)
Some militaries use infantry transport vehicles developed from tanks. For example:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namer

Re:The Cannons on the B-29 Bomber by gherkin0 on Wednesday December 02, 2015 @01:00PM (#10664595)
Though, IIRC, the tank that's based off of was already designed to carry some passengers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merkava#Specifications_of_mode...

Re:The Cannons on the B-29 Bomber by xixi77 on Wednesday December 02, 2015 @01:08PM (#10664646)
It's a pretty cool vehicle, but with the $3MM price tag I'm not sure how suitable it is for an infantry carrier... But I agree, this type of vehicles are surely going to get more common.
Re:The Cannons on the B-29 Bomber by douche on Wednesday December 02, 2015 @03:19PM (#10665518)
According to Wikipedia[1], the Bradley is more expensive, at $3.16 million

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M2_Bradley

Re:The Cannons on the B-29 Bomber by jasonwatkinspdx on Wednesday December 02, 2015 @03:43PM (#10665656)
The Isrealis have had mixed results from the Namer and Merkava (though the Merkava is an icon of pride, so this comment might draw some cheerleading). I think the basic idea of having extra passenger room in a MBT for flexibility in evolving situations is pretty sound, but these particular vehicles have proven pretty vulnerable in close in urban combat vs smart patient infantry.