PDA

View Full Version : Kool new Kop toy...........soon




tod evans
05-23-2013, 05:17 AM
Look for city cops to have this technology on your dime in the near future..

It's all about fighting terrorism..:rolleyes:

http://www.roadandtrack.com/go/news/new-cars/go-news-meet-boeings-phantom-badger-light-tactical-vehicle

http://www.roadandtrack.com/cm/roadandtrack/images/Fx/ku-xlarge-sm.jpg


The Phantom Badger isn't a children's cartoon superhero, or something that creeps up to your house at night and messes up your garbage. No, it's the latest ground tactical vehicle from Boeing, and it looks downright awesome, in a butch golf cart sort of way.

The V22 Internally Transportable Vehicle, as the official nomenclature goes, has been developed with the help of MSI Defense Solutions (http://www.msidefense.com/), reportedly employing NASCAR racing technologies with the vehicle. It's Boeing's proposal for a vehicle able to be internally transported inside a V-22 Osprey tilt rotor, but is more capable and more sturdily built than an ATV.

Finished in the correct tan hue, it looks like a narrowed-down, kiddies' version of the original HMMWV. It's been tested at Fort Bragg and the Nevada Automotive Testing Center, to make sure it stands up to the job it's applying for. It has four-wheel steering, enhanced shock absorbers, and is claimed to be "relatively comfortable" for what it is, something that an ATV would have a hard time to match. The Phantom Badger also features mission-specific modules behind the front seats, so it can be quickly modified depending of the task at hand.

Uriel999
05-23-2013, 05:26 AM
Don't worry it goes in he osprey...they will all end up smoldering heaps of scrap metal because osprey landing SOP is to crash killing all occupants.

Uriel999
05-23-2013, 05:27 AM
In all honesty though I do see a tactical use for a jeep being quickly deployed on the battlefield.

tod evans
05-23-2013, 05:35 AM
In all honesty though I do see a tactical use for a jeep being quickly deployed on the battlefield.


Something tells me that the battlefield these were designed for is intercity alleys not so much running around in Sandville..

AngryCanadian
05-23-2013, 08:05 AM
This is the latest ground tactical vehicle? with no modern protection agaisnt enemy attacks? where's the fire support? armor? unfortunately this is such a waste of tax payers money into making in these useless none needed ground tactical vehicles that look like a joke.

From that article comment section, the comments are a freaking joke.

Acala
05-23-2013, 09:11 AM
Stupid. But remember, the goal is to take money from you and give it to, in this case, Boeing. It doesn't need to be practical, useful, or needed in any way. The vehicle itself only needs to provide some kind of plausible excuse for the transfer of wealth.

tangent4ronpaul
05-23-2013, 10:06 AM
Of course these things are desperately needed!

http://www.militarygolfcourseguide.com/

The Military-Leisure Golf Complex
http://www.alternet.org/story/82009/the_military-leisure_golf_complex

Pentagon elites and high government officials are tee-ing off at taxpayer expense at hundreds of courses all over the planet.

Back in 1975, Senator William Proxmire (D-Wisconsin) decried the fact that the Department of Defense spent nearly $14 million each year to maintain and operate 300 military-run golf courses scattered across the globe. In 1996, the weekly television series America's Defense Monitor noted that "Pentagon elites and high government officials [were still] tee-ing off at taxpayer expense" at some "234 golf courses maintained by the U.S. armed forces worldwide." In the intervening twenty-one years, despite a modest decrease in the number of military golf courses, not much had changed. The military was still out on the links. Today, the military claims to operate a mere 172 golf courses worldwide, suggesting that over thirty years after Proxmire's criticisms, a modicum of reform has taken place. Don't believe it.

-t

Dr.3D
05-23-2013, 10:37 AM
Why not just bring back the M151A2?
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b2/JeepRightTopDownM151.jpg/800px-JeepRightTopDownM151.jpg
It would still fit into the small spaces that thing does.

Acala
05-23-2013, 10:38 AM
Why not just bring back the M151A2?
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b2/JeepRightTopDownM151.jpg/800px-JeepRightTopDownM151.jpg
It would still fit into the small spaces that thing does.

Because it doesn't cost a million bucks to build

MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2
05-23-2013, 10:41 AM
Because it doesn't cost a million bucks to build


Slackers. The other things don't cost a million to build, either. They cost a million to buy.

Dr.3D
05-23-2013, 10:41 AM
Because it doesn't cost a million bucks to build

Yeah, I know that.... I have one out in my backyard. Wouldn't though if it cost a million bucks.

http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg202/DrThreeDee/MUTT5-1.jpg
It's little and doesn't go very fast, but it will go almost anywhere.

tod evans
05-23-2013, 10:50 AM
Why not just bring back the M151A2?


But, but....emissions........yeah! What about emissions eh?..:rolleyes:

Dr.3D
05-23-2013, 10:52 AM
But, but....emissions........yeah! What about emissions eh?..:rolleyes:
Just get Gore to skip one of his "climate change" lecture flights and that would make up the difference for at least 20 of these.