Armor in Zombie Outbreaks

[Exatreides]

I started thinking, most of the zombie stories, both small scale and large scale only talk about the CQC of fighting Zombies, almost no mention is ever made to Large military formations.

Tanks
How incredibly effective would tanks be against hoards of the undead? Shells that can blow up buildings would destroy a undead mass, 50 caliber Machine gun could eviserate any ghouls that got close. Not to mention they could simply run over them if they had to.

Aircraft.
Close Air Support anyone? A Spooky spectre gunship or a A-10 would destroy a undead mass in seconds.

Helicopters
Could clean a area of undead, then deliver ground forces in to mop up.

Really. How could America fall? Even with the undead multiplying fast, we could still make bullets faster then they can spread. Thats why I really don't think out side of third world countries a Zombie outbreak would last very long, the sheer Tech advantage we would have over them.

What do you guys think about Armor and Military Tech in large scale zombie outbreak? You think it would be as effective as I stated?

[Cykotic]

You have a bloody good point.... There is no way that countries like England and America could fall to a zombie epidemic... The Military forces along with Police Armed responce units (a.k.a SO19) could easily take out the dead.

However....

It would require strategic planning. Zombies can't stratagize and that makes them more dangerous....

[Tullaryx]

Good points. I think the military in itself would do well on its own, but I think their effectiveness might be compromised by the fact that some members of the military may go AWOL to go home and protect their families and loved ones. Then you have the problem of refugees and civilians hading en masse to military installations and bases seeking protection.

Of all the government institutions it would be the military that will survive with any semblance of order, but they will still experience large number of losses due to human-to-human conflicts.

[dannoofthedead]

Very good point. It would be very hard and very prolonged before a country like the U.S. could fall to a plague of zombies but not entirely impossible. Much like you see in the original Dawn of the Dead, people would not be willing to surrender their family members and friends up so readily to specialized units of anything. Also, it would take time for us to understand that these things are not really human anymore. People in America especially (the land where you can sue a fast food joint because you're fat) would have mixed emotions about shooting "rioters" which is more than likely what the ghouls would be seen as for at least the first day or two. Reports of cannibalism and the dead rising would be far fetched and with so many skeptics in all levels of power and society it would be near impossible to quickly give the order to "kill on sight.

Also, when you take into account that not all soldiers and police officers, especially the ones who have families or are too green to know how to properly react under stress (which comes with time and training) would be able to stand their ground the line of control gradually falls apart. A tanker gets jumpy and fires a round into a friendly cluster of soldiers, a cop says yo hell with it and leaves his post to save his family, one piece after another the wall falls down.
Idealy, the armed forces and local law enforcement would stand on training and proceedure alone and would never allow an outbreak of the undead spread further than a city or two. But human nature has to be accounted more heavily than any amount of learning and the need for self preservation will always win out.

Mind you this is my opinion and nothing else.

[Arcades057]

There are a few problems with this way of thinking.

1) Armored vehicles. I cannot see any sort of main battle tank, like the Abrams or the Chieftain, being anything much more than a tomb to its occupants or a way for a small group of the living to attack another group of living. Tanks can run people over, sure, but even the largest tank can come to a stop when charging through groups of the living dead. The main gun of an M1 Abrams MBT is 120mm; it would not be used against the LD, but rather against fortifications of the living. The tank would serve a better role as a machinegun platform. Let us not forget about the fact that gasoline, even diesel, has a shelf life. I believe that life is only about 3 months, after which time it must be treated with something (don't remember what) to make it work the way it's supposed to. So after a few weeks that badass tank is nothing but a pretty cool bunker, unless you know how to treat the gasoline or make your own.

2) Aircraft. Guess what planes need to get up and come down? Fuel. Also aircraft need runways large enough to accomodate them. Something such as the Spectre AC-130 gunship would need a runway large enough to accomodate a 747--that rules out any smaller, private airports. This means you've gotta find either a military base or a major airport like LAX. Think you'd be alone in LA or NY or any other major city?

3) Helicopters. Still need fuel. Still need a field and enough people to service the things. They would be the most useful of the three, however one would run into far more problems with helicopters than they would with ground vehicles; imagine running low on fuel and trying to find a place to land in an urban area, or being out in the middle of nowhere in the same bird.

As for the rest, rest assured of the following. In a living dead situation things would go down much the same as they do during any other sort of natural disaster. You'd have one group of people sitting around and waiting it out. They would not prepare; they would simply assume that the gubbment would come in and scoop them up if their lives were in danger. They would die in droves, all the while sitting on roofs and crying "we need help." Another group would be your "head for the hills" types, who would do just that. They would pack up and flee wherever they were, heading to wherever they wanted to go. Their cars would clog the arteries of the country and their bodies would add to the undead hordes. This would leave large caches of supplies lying around for the taking around major roads, though, which would be a good thing. The third group would be those who are prepared. They may evacuate, they may stay where they are; rest assured they have a plan. If they stay home, they'll have power and food and water and be armed to the teeth, plus they'll have an evac plan ready; if they leave, they'll be heading somewhere in a straight line, planning to spend as very little time between points A and B as possible.

Notice there isn't any room for people who decide to go to work that day, so no more bullets will be made; no more gas will be produced. Possibly, if society can survive past a few days and people begin to take stock and realize that certain things are needed in a post-dead world, then bullets will be made again. Now this is not to say that there are not copious amounts of ammunition lying around, for there are. But that will all burn up eventually. And if there are people cruising around in tanks or planes or helos shooting up the place, it'll run out even sooner.

[Philly_SWAT]

Let us not forget about the fact that gasoline, even diesel, has a shelf life. I believe that life is only about 3 months, after which time it must be treated with something (don't remember what) to make it work the way it's supposed to.

So what about Mel Gibson's "Road Warrior". It looked to me that in that movie it was way past 3 months after the initial problem, most everyone had rotten teeth and little brainpower. Do you take it that they were treating the gasoline, or was the movie just inaccurate?

[Exatreides]

There are a few problems with this way of thinking.

1) Armored vehicles. I cannot see any sort of main battle tank, like the Abrams or the Chieftain, being anything much more than a tomb to its occupants or a way for a small group of the living to attack another group of living. Tanks can run people over, sure, but even the largest tank can come to a stop when charging through groups of the living dead. The main gun of an M1 Abrams MBT is 120mm; it would not be used against the LD, but rather against fortifications of the living. The tank would serve a better role as a machinegun platform. Let us not forget about the fact that gasoline, even diesel, has a shelf life. I believe that life is only about 3 months, after which time it must be treated with something (don't remember what) to make it work the way it's supposed to. So after a few weeks that badass tank is nothing but a pretty cool bunker, unless you know how to treat the gasoline or make your own.

2) Aircraft. Guess what planes need to get up and come down? Fuel. Also aircraft need runways large enough to accomodate them. Something such as the Spectre AC-130 gunship would need a runway large enough to accomodate a 747--that rules out any smaller, private airports. This means you've gotta find either a military base or a major airport like LAX. Think you'd be alone in LA or NY or any other major city?

3) Helicopters. Still need fuel. Still need a field and enough people to service the things. They would be the most useful of the three, however one would run into far more problems with helicopters than they would with ground vehicles; imagine running low on fuel and trying to find a place to land in an urban area, or being out in the middle of nowhere in the same bird.

As for the rest, rest assured of the following. In a living dead situation things would go down much the same as they do during any other sort of natural disaster. You'd have one group of people sitting around and waiting it out. They would not prepare; they would simply assume that the gubbment would come in and scoop them up if their lives were in danger. They would die in droves, all the while sitting on roofs and crying "we need help." Another group would be your "head for the hills" types, who would do just that. They would pack up and flee wherever they were, heading to wherever they wanted to go. Their cars would clog the arteries of the country and their bodies would add to the undead hordes. This would leave large caches of supplies lying around for the taking around major roads, though, which would be a good thing. The third group would be those who are prepared. They may evacuate, they may stay where they are; rest assured they have a plan. If they stay home, they'll have power and food and water and be armed to the teeth, plus they'll have an evac plan ready; if they leave, they'll be heading somewhere in a straight line, planning to spend as very little time between points A and B as possible.

Notice there isn't any room for people who decide to go to work that day, so no more bullets will be made; no more gas will be produced. Possibly, if society can survive past a few days and people begin to take stock and realize that certain things are needed in a post-dead world, then bullets will be made again. Now this is not to say that there are not copious amounts of ammunition lying around, for there are. But that will all burn up eventually. And if there are people cruising around in tanks or planes or helos shooting up the place, it'll run out even sooner.

1. Against Large masses of Undead the 120 MM cannon with HE shells would be more effective then the machine gun, I only see the machine gun being really usefull if they get to close, or for suppression fire of living targets. While Fuel is a problem, Securing depots ect could lengthen this time for awhile, Or tanks could simply serve as Stationary firing positions hurling Shells at groups of undead before they even approach a possition, thus saving fuel.

2. I agree, finding a airport would be difficult to use, and defending a military base could become problomatic with all the civilian traffic headed in that direction, I think air support is always vital, against the undead or Human opponent.

3. Agree about Helicopters Fuel would always be a problem.

Logistis of armored vehicles is what would kill their chances, however I think that if mobilized quickly enough during a outbreak(first few hours possibly) and moved into possition to protect 'vital assets' that the chances of falling to a zombie outbreak are small. However the goverment recognizing and acting fast enough is going to be a problem(Katrina anyone?)

Sooner or later all Fuel would run out, and all weapons to. That doesn't mean that they shouldn't try, if the outbreak is stopped fast enough, or atleast contained. Then well maybe we might have a chance. I think atleast.

[Svengoolie]

If you could get the undead all clumped up together in one place, rounds fired off from tanks might be effective. But, the only problem with that is that ghouls tend to congregate in highly populated areas--cities and towns....where armor like that is not very effective. If you want to see how well a tank corps performs in a heavily built up area like a city, see the Battle of Stalingrad for details.

In terms of fuel, their intake is astounding, and if fuel stocks are unreliable, they'll be ineffective before too long if they're being used in the type of terrain they're built for--primarily rural areas.

[Exatreides]

Fire on the heavily populated town that needs to be cleared from afar, eithe trapping the dead in side/killing them/ or forcing them into streets. A few A-10 straffing runs ect. The town could be cleared rather easily with the need for red neck southerns and their shot gun militas to risk their necks trying to clear it :).

Tanks do Preform bad in Urban enviroments against HUMAN's who can shoot back. The dead however, lack the ability to return fire.

[Svengoolie]

Opening up on a heavily populated town will:
A. Kill anyone alive that might be hiding there, causing more unnecessary casualties.
B. Destroy any resources that town might possess which could aid the living survivors.

The purpose of the Armed Forces in that situation wouldn't be to kill civilians and destroy supplies...it would be to save civilians and acquire supplies--the exact opposite effect of what you're suggesting.

Tanks are ineffective in an urban enviornment because urban areas are built up with little room for those vehicles to maneuver--tanks are designed to fight primarily in open areas with lots of room to move around. There are cars and other debris on the streets....and while they can most certainly drive over it, doing so would cause much more destruction than necessary--run over cars, trucks, homes and gas mains could explode, the pavement will be ripped up, etc. And, those vehicles can easily become bogged down amoung the debris--especially if they're following your advice and blowing the crap out of everything.

Hence, heavy armor would be pretty much ineffective in an LD situation.

[rikimaru]

this zombie outbreak may confuse the general public but i think the armed forces has the ability to orginaize before they would be so stranded and im sure we have tons of resever war time sullplies stored on bases.

I think that the governemt would accept the living dead thing before the general public.

1 they may have caused it to begin with.
2 so many reports of the undead would come in the government would likely prepare for mass assault after the realize small fireteams wont work.
3 theres plent of airforce bases that are isolated from citys by many miles with no cemetarys nere by espeshally in california. So they could mobilize planes helis and such without interferance.

i think the governemt could starve off total destruction. However the casualtys would be enormus. After order was eventually restored however danger would still be present because somtimes people who die arnt discovered for days at a time or weeks. Meaning we would have to live in a state of martial law forever with armed guards patroling everywhere and tabs kept on everyone simply for safty.

humans would survive i think but it would be a crappy existence.

[Tullaryx]

I do believe the military as a whole would react and mobilize much faster than the civilian law enforcement and the government. But that's pretty much due to the military's ability to be self-sufficient within their respective bases and depots. The government on the other hand would take time to come up with a credible and doable plan to take care of the crisis. Case in point: last year's reaction to Katrina. The military was ready to help the moment they were asked to do so, but all civilian agencies dithered around and delayed from doing anything of substance by bureacracy and politics. I can see the same happening with a zombie outbreak that goes national.

[mista_mo]

Hell, with Katrina, there were Canadian rescue teams from Vancouver before American civilian rescue teams were there..it's ridiculous eh?

Armour would most certainly be usless in a city (ever been to Toronto or Ottawa or Hamilton before? it's congested enough without car wrecks strewn everywhere, dead bodies piling up, walking corpses, building falling down and crumbling etc). Suppose, and imagine this if you will, a tank like a leapord mk.2 or the like, crumbling along through a city thats ruined, wrecks everywhere, road blocks up, corpses on the road etc. Wouldn't there be a danger that if the tank drives over something or a similar situation, that the tracks could mess up and come undone? I've heard about this happening before, and I think it's a risk that has to be accounted for. You'd have to haul ass to fix the tread, all the while the engine noise would be attracting undead. Eventually, they are going to reach the tank and everyone will be locked inside, and they will die from starvation, while the survivors will be far too weak to do anything to defend themselves when they turn. the entire crew would be killed.
Now, it could happen, but I'll admit, i'm no expert on tanks at all, but I think it is a pretty feasible situation. Plus, if they are stuck where they are, all of their ammo will run out eventually, and since they can't move, they are screwed, and would have to abandon the thing.
Personally, I can see tanks forming as temperary road blocks, that just happen to have a big friggin' cannon on em that can blow the **** outta zombies. That would probibly be their main purpose I think.

[EvilNed]

Whenever someone says "armor", I always think platemail, scalemail or chainmail.

Heeey... A suit of chainmail wouldn't be that bad to have in a zombie situation!

[Eyebiter]

re: Armor
Back in the 70's the US started to preposition heavy equipment overseas. Makes one wonder how many tanks and other armored vehicles are still inside the USA right now? Not to mention much of our obsolete equipment is either expended as targets, sold to friendly nations, or sunk in the ocean as artifical reefs.

Add to that the American legions are currently scattered to the four winds, soldiers in South Korea, Europe, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Afghanistan. Think in any zombie crisis there would be a concentrated operation to bring troops back to the US. Question is would there be enough airlift or sealift capacity still functioning to bring back all of their equipment? Or would some of it be abandoned overseas?


Re: military response speed
Think it depends on what kind of living dead epidemic we are talking about. The military would react much differently in classic Night of the Living Dead scenario compared with a Dawn 04 fast zombie situation. Or for that matter, a 28 Days Later infected humans outbreak.

[Svengoolie]

To Eyebiter:

In the Dawn remake's "We Interrupt This Program", I seem to remember a bit where the Secretary of State or whatever says that even in this crisis America will uphold its committment to its allies...

[p2501]

i think this is maybe the 37th time this argument has come up. and sorry to say the real issue is time.

If were going to jump the shark and say "OMG zombie R reel!" the effectiveness of a military response would depend on timing. if it were to happen right now, we'd be ****ed as most of our combat personal are in the middle east. So whatever fight there would be, would be short.

If it were to happen, and IF we could have a rapid response from the military, then all of your OMG big gunz VS Zombies wet dream would come true.


Anyways. In regards to armor deployments, A tank even unarmed would wither the undead numbers just by slowly running them over. Nothing beats 70 tons of armor squishing your ass at 10 MPH. As for the 120mm cannon, as far as I know an Abrahams can fire a Minus depression setting, so it can fire into the ground, given that, and the it’s capacity to deliver HE shells on target. Whoever said the tank would be useless is a ****ing moron. And should read a book, on modern armor as opposed to playing Xbox.

The logistics angle for the tanks is the easiest of the proposed weapons. Diesel fuel is designed to be stored long term(with an additive Arcades was correct here), and it’s readily available in just about every rural gas station in the country. further I’ve venture 1 out of 4 urban gas station stocks it. So fueling a tanks without military support wouldn’t be too complicated.

As for rearming it, there your options are of course somewhat limited. Also while the Abrahams would get bogged down in tight urban centers, honestly that’s the last place you’d want to employ it. Sweeping in an urban setting would be best suited for a twin armed humvee (MG 40 passenger side, with a .50 on top) backed up by Bradleys and close air support as a QRF. The Abrahams is simply to bulky for close quarters work, also it’s ordinance would create too much splash damage for anyone to operate around it.

At best in an interior urban setting the tanks would best be used for patroling larger urban roads, and for providing perimeter security at temporary re-supply bases.

Moving on………….

My favorite the AC-130 is next, but I’m going to lump all air support into one paragraph.

In a short term high sortie response, airpower would of course own. Guided munitions aside, a simple a-10 would shred any target-able large groups it came across. The AC130 would be a different matter. I would more see that used not some much as a hunter-killer platform, but as it was suggested a close air support role. Given ground direction, to larger targets, it would be unstoppable.

The problem with airpower would be again rearming and refueling. Not so much in terms of supplies, but in an area to do it. Given my proximity to Dover AFB, I feel somewhat safe in saying that, the facility could be locked down and maintained with a decent seized group of personnel. If those personal were backed up with armor support (I dunno the flight time from our armor storage bases in the Midwest, to Dover) it could be held either until it wasn’t needed or until other facilities were prepped.

How long our supplies would hold our, is information I don not have.

Addressing two other things.

1) civilian response is going to be of course faster than federal. Use FEMA as criteria when considering every possible Fed response time. As for first responders expect EMS and Fire to split before the police do. Hospitals will be unusable by day 2 of this entire thing going full tilt boogie. Seeing that your first responders are going to bug out and head home taking supplies in tow.


2) I expect the police to be entirely too busy dealing with riots and urban unrest to have direct time to mobilize into any sort of tactical response. This is where the military mobilization would then come into play.



I think that about covers it.


No wait Eyebiter. when last i checked we still store a decent supply of our armored equip both in bases in the middle states and the southwest. so there would be forces to deply out and about. also alot of NG armories atleast around me still have a Bradley or two in their motorpools.

as for returning our troops. i can seen them dropping a ****load of supplies in the hustle, but i remember eating lunch ourside of Dover AFB during the build up to the first gulfwar. you cannot imagine how fast their air traffic personell can stack, pack and ship a loaded c-130. it quite honestly, one of the more impressive things i've ever seen.

[Tullaryx]

p2501 hit it right on the nose. I would also add a few things to what he's pointed out.

I, myself, wouldn't even bring an M1A1/A2 MBT into an urban environment that would most likely be jammed with not just its decaying inhabitants, but wrecked vehicles, abandoned barricades, etc... The M1 would be best used, as p2501 mentioned earlier, for perimeter security. In fact, the M1 would do best as a mobile defensive hardpoint at bridges, thoroughfares, and highways that come in and out of urban areas. This would take advantage of the M1's weapon systems and its ability to move quick if it has to abandon a position. In the clogged streets of a major metropolitan, the M1 would still be able to use its size to bulldoze its way through, but it would take longer and if for some reason the vehicle breaksdown, puts its crew in the uneviable position of having to sit tight in the tank until a rescue team arrives, or leave and try to get out on foot. Either prospect would mean a high probability of death for the crew. Out in a city's perimeter an M1 would have more room to maneuver and if it breaks down, more open space for its crew to footslog their way to the nearest working vehicle.

The type of armor that would work best in an urban environment would be the M2 Bradleys for the Army and the LAV-25's the USMC uses. They're heavy enough that tipping them over due to mass number of zombies would be improbable and they have enough traction to go over most wrecked vehicles and barricades. If they come across some that are impassable, they have enough firepower to blast an opening for them to move through. They also have the advantage of being able to carry a squad of infantry or room to stow any healthy survivors they come across.

As for close-air support, an AC130 would be an ideal weapons platform if it means destroying as much of a horde as possible with acceptable losses to surrounding structures. AC130 would best be suited for targeting large moving hordes of undead out in the open. Really, any aircraft that has hardpoints to attach weapons to would do well providing CAS. But having them sortie nonstop wouldn't be prudent. Even large air bases like Dover would have a finite supply of fuel for its aircraft. Any future supplies of fuel would be hard to come by and would most likely come by a land convoy moving out of the secured confines of the base.

In the end, the military would have a much easier time adapting and surviving to a good degree in a large worldwide outbreak. The one weakness fortified military installations like SAC Bases, Army and Marines bases would be instances when deaths within the perimeter goes unnoticed, especially in the first couple of weeks with the influx of refugees seeking safety. Then you have soldiers unable to reach family going AWOL to try and save them. But a military, especially the US military would react much faster. They would still incur massive losses, but not to the point that they lose operational integrity like civilian departments (police, firefighters, EMS, etc...).

[Arcades057]

Grab an MBT, sure; remember how useful they are in urban environments. Imagine your Abrams hitting a wall of dead flesh at ten MPH... Now imagine that tank slowing to a crawl and stopping, with you surrounded by those same zombies. A tank seems like a great thing to use, but that's the "XBox crowd" that thinks it. You are NEVER to operate something like an Abrams without infantry support in an urban environment. Period. There's a reason for that and it's not just the fact that idjits can drop Molotovs on you from above; your field of vision is limited. Any tank commander worth his salt operates his vehicle with an open cupola while sitting on the turret. Now you're making crazy noise with the engine and all the clunking of your tracks tearing up whatever isn't nailed down. You can't hear the three or four zombies that just crawled onto your tank. Now you're lunch.

Tanks still sound like a good idea? If so, I suggest you study ANY military report written on the subject of armored vehicle use in urban environments. A more intelligent vehicle would be something along the lines of a Stryker or an LAV of some sort. These vehicles have a higher top speed, a smaller turret rotation radius, and they blow through less fuel than a mammoth like the M1A1.

[Wooley]

http://www.military.com/soldiertech/0,14632,Soldiertech_120mm,,00.html?ESRC=soldiertec h.nl

Who said tank guns were useless? A 120mm shotgun shell would put a lot of hurt on whatever was downrange.

As far as the whole 'Military Kicking Zombie Ass' thing, let's look at history here-During the 1906 San Fransisco earthquake and fire, Mayor Eugene Smitz dithered with the decision to let the Army dynamite firebreaks in order to starve the fire. His dilema was one, he'd be blowing up homes and property of his rich buddies, two, he wasn't sure he had the authority to do so, and three, he was wondering if doing it would open the city up to being sued. While he pondered these questions, more and more of the city burned, until such time as he made the decision to go for it.

The lession to take here is, by the time the full might of the military would be unleashed, it'd be too late to save much of anything.

You really think our military can fight a war in a US city without killing a lot of non-combatants, and destroying a lot of homes, businesses, and critical civil infrastructure?

Two, most of our military forces are overseas. At one point, 9 or the US Army's 10 active duty divisions were deployed overseas. 3 of the Marine Corps's 5 divisions were overseas. And 60% of the total National Guard forces were overseas as well. They weren't equally deployed either-some states had seen as much as 60% of their units called up.

That doesn't leave much to combat the zombie uprising here at home. I doubt law enforcement would be up to the challenge.

If they got the call to come home RFN, they'd leave a huge amount of their equipment behind, I'm sure. Assuming we would have the airlift/sealift assets to even get the troops home before we lose the airports/seaports.

An armor unit isn't anything but ad hoc infantry without their tanks. The tanks aren't much use without their tanker trucks to refuel them, or their recovery and maintance vehicles to repair broken down equipment.

Armies travel on their logistical trail, and modern armies have huge logistical trails. When the logistics break down, you have units going without food, water, fuel, spare parts, medical equipment, and ammo. Shortly after that, you lose the unit.

[Tullaryx]

Well, despite having a large number of military units overseas or in deployment, the US military still keeps a large enough garrison of troops to man the home front. Then there'll be the combat units recently rotated back to the States. I think in the end, the military as a unit tasked with keeping order in a situation like a zombie outbreak would be more adaptable and have the firepower and discipline to do so. And I think in such a situation collateral damage to civilian non-combatants is a forgone conclusion.

[p2501]

Tanks still sound like a good idea? If so, I suggest you study ANY military report written on the subject of armored vehicle use in urban environments. A more intelligent vehicle would be something along the lines of a Stryker or an LAV of some sort. These vehicles have a higher top speed, a smaller turret rotation radius, and they blow through less fuel than a mammoth like the M1A1.

Why are zombies hurling Molotovs?

In regards to tanks the end all be all arguement comes down to the Isrealies. they've been using ground armor in urban setting for decades, and simply put they're more adept at it then we are. so if they're doing it, than yes it came be done, and it can be done effectively.

As for employing a tank without ground personell, i don't think i gave the impression i advocated that. nor would i, it would be assinine. However, i did/do know 2 tanks drivers, and i can say by proxy it's an disturbingly hard to **** up vehicle.

while i wouldn't reccmonend a STRYKER for anything, it's still a plentiful vehicle. Altough the Humvee or Bradley would be a better choice.

[mista_mo]

Strykers are junk..they've been likened to 4 million doller coffins. I'd go with a LAV 3...hell they're old but they work, and are a helluva better vehicle. just my 2 cents..strykers are junk

[Tullaryx]

Strykers are junk..they've been likened to 4 million doller coffins. I'd go with a LAV 3...hell they're old but they work, and are a helluva better vehicle. just my 2 cents..strykers are junk

In an environment against insurgents and the like, yes they're pretty useless since they're not armored enough, but against zomboids and the like --- unless they're like Philip Nutman's rpg-wielding zombies --- they should do well.

[mista_mo]

I think they have a higher probibility to roll over then most vehicles do as well. I stick by they are junk, and should be replaced by better vehicles statement

[Eyebiter]

On the topic - there is a great living dead short story in the fiction section called Tank by W.D. Robertson, 7-Nov-99. Highly recommended.

[p2501]

great find

[TexasZombie]

Howdy, zombie fans!

Glad y'all liked "Tank".

The idea, as one might suspect, is that protection comes at a price. "Dub" found the ultimate ride and hiding spot, but ultimately paid for it with his life by isolating himself from "Everyone Else" (even if they were zombies).

If "Dub" had stuck to the cities he wouldn't have lasted nearly as long - too many things to hang up large armored vehicles, as many here have mentioned.

Even in the open, however, armored vehicles are prone to problems - the one thing I didn't go into, but which would be the biggest issue, is maintenace. Even user friendly armor requires extensive and highly-specialized maintenance, training, and tools.

If I ever get around to finishing the sequel to "Block Party", the various uses to which a Combat Engineering Vehicle can be put in urban and rural environments will be explored with Bob and Frank...

Take care,
Will (aka TexasZombie)

[p2501]

hah, cool. thanks for stopping by.

now finish that damn story.

[Publius]

2) Aircraft. Guess what planes need to get up and come down? Fuel. Also aircraft need runways large enough to accomodate them. Something such as the Spectre AC-130 gunship would need a runway large enough to accomodate a 747--that rules out any smaller, private airports. This means you've gotta find either a military base or a major airport like LAX. Think you'd be alone in LA or NY or any other major city?

747s require over 6,000 feet of runway. The AC-130 can operate on under 3,000 feet in a pinch, and weighs less than a fourth as much fully loaded. There are over 4,000 paved runways in the US that are 3,000 feet or longer. Turboprop engines would probably be easier to find fuel for than jets, too, although fuel will still be a big problem.

[wayzim]

[QUOTE=Wooley]http://www.military.com/soldiertech/0,14632,Soldiertech_120mm,,00.html?ESRC=soldiertec h.nl

"Who said tank guns were useless? A 120mm shotgun shell would put a lot of hurt on whatever was downrange.

As far as the whole 'Military Kicking Zombie Ass' thing, let's look at history here-During the 1906 San Fransisco earthquake and fire, Mayor Eugene Smitz dithered with the decision to let the Army dynamite firebreaks in order to starve the fire. His dilema was one, he'd be blowing up homes and property of his rich buddies, two, he wasn't sure he had the authority to do so, and three, he was wondering if doing it would open the city up to being sued. While he pondered these questions, more and more of the city burned, until such time as he made the decision to go for it.

The lession to take here is, by the time the full might of the military would be unleashed, it'd be too late to save much of anything. "

Just finished reading a most excellent book on the San Fran earthquake of 1906 (The Great Earthquake and Firestorms of 1906 by Philip L. Fradkin). The problem was not dithering but the art of demolition itself. What delay there was in implimenting the plan to create a series of firebreaks, very little when it came to blowing up buildings in the poorer districts, particularly China Town which the city planners hated, the solution actually contributed to the fires.
Both military and fire teams had little expertise in this type of demolition, and they largely used a combination of black powder and a low grade of explosives used by miners to open tunnels. This miscalculation resulted in hot debris being carried aloof to untouched structures.
Additionally, they also accidently destroyed some warehouses where flammable materials were stored.
Eventually suitable devices were implimented, but the damage was already done.

Wayne Z

[Tullaryx]

I was never one for believing the military will kick ass and take zombie names right from the get-go. They'll run into the same problems everyone else would and thats how to effectively combat and destroy them. But I do think the military has the hardware, manpower and discipline to survive as a working entity than the police, fire and emergency departments.

[raptorman]

I fly military aircraft for a living, and I can tell you that it takes a lot of man hours of maintenance to keep them safely in the air. You would not believe the number of daily, weekly, monthly and yearly maintenance checks required. Fueling and de-fueling trucks must always be on hand. A qualified maintenance team (numbering in the hundreds depending on the aircraft) must be at the ready to troubleshoot that pesky master caution light that wont go out prior to take off.


An airforce gunship requires a lot of maintenance to keep in airborne. The airframe is older than some of your parents. The aircraft I flew in the desert rolled off the line in the early stages of Nam.

Now when it comes to warthogs, you may get 20 flight hours before needing HEAVY maintenance to the engines and avionics.

If it flies, it wont last long in the PAW without big time support from maintenance person.

[general tbag]

i hate to say it but all scenarios are bs as zombies arent on one side and military is on the other. it guerilla warfare at it finest. for some parts the military would break down and so would local police. things would run good for awhile until both resources and mental health started breaking down.

look at the la riots and how fast the police lost that situation. and this is just one part of a urban city.
it wont only be the zombies u have to fight but also the mass hysteria of the genral public, both being just as deadly .

[zombieparanoia]

As someone who knows very little about arms and armor(apparently I'm the only one) I don't understand why tank treads would break from running over zombies, aren't they made of thick metal?