So what?
You’re driving to Berlin to shoot Hitler, & you friggin worry about scuffing the pavement?
FUGGGIDDABOUDIT!
That’s what I was thinking myself- the thermal sight and laser rangefinder for the main gun would be worth more than the weight of the tank in gold back then.
And you could definitely keep the 50 loaded; those things haven’t significantly changed since WWI. I suspect that it would be a relatively trivial task to either re-arm the M1 with M1919 machine guns, or to make a production run of 7.62 NATO, provided that it wasn’t all shot up.
Just make sure his pearl-handled revolvers aren’t within reach.
The anecdote wasn’t intended to convey an impression that the M1’s unreliable, just that they need a non-negligible amount of effort and supply behind them.
It’s been about 6 years now so I’m fuzzy on the details of the story, but as I remember it, the reason the tanks were down so much in this guy’s company weren’t because of constant failure, but because cost-cutting measures meant that any failure was a serious problem. Replacement parts were a long time coming, there weren’t enough mechanics to cover everything and the crews didn’t get much time with their tanks because they were having to do things like patrolling in HMMWVs (there were a lot of unkind things said about -that- practice…)
Admittedly, there wasn’t much for armor to do during the occupation of Iraq, but it’s still a notable point that even with the huge amount of money we burned on it, it wasn’t enough to keep everything fully mission ready.
[QUOTE=Patton]
They’re ivory. Only a pimp from a cheap New Orleans whorehouse would carry a pearl-handled pistol.
[/QUOTE]
Post war some Commonwealth forces may have a snigger at the name (if not the performance).
Heh. Good point. Not to worry until 1946 - and given the huge media footprint the wonder tank would have during the war, the Rev. W. Awdry might just pick another name for his pride and joy!
No, as long as it’s not John Thomas you’re good. 