From: roger (rfrancis@cfl.rr.com)
Date: Wed Aug 17 2005 - 07:12:39 PDT
Ronzo. Thanks for the info. Now I understand. I didn't know there was a TM
that explained the types of vehicles. I really appreciate that info. I'll
look for a copy. I was not trying to make it something it wasn't (I figured
it wasn't a combat vehicle) but I thought that the government put a number
on just about anything (like the p-38 can opener...) so I was trying to
figure out what this one was.
I am happy with 1956 Suburban Carryall. Thats whats on the Data Plate.
Thanks again for the info.
RogerWilco
www.usarmysignalcorps.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ron" <rojoha@adelphia.net>
To: "Military Vehicles Mailing List" <mil-veh@mil-veh.org>
Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2005 8:55 AM
Subject: Re: [MV] M designation for Civilian-type military vehicles
> Welllllll, Roger,
> Uhhhh, in a word, "NO".
> Your vehicle is what is known as an 'Administrative' vehicle. No M
> number or special name. Just a Chevrolet Carryall that was purchased to
> fulfill a need on the post. 2 wheel drive, not remotely close to a
> "Tactical" vehicle. Not intended to drive around off road in support of
> "Combat" vehicles.
> It was bought to haul the mail around the base on paved roads, or haul
> folks around as a small bus, doing administrative tasks. Like all those
> Dodge Dakotas that the Army and Air Force bought as beaters on the bases
in
> the late 80's and 90's. Or the Cushman 3 wheelers, John Deere grounds
> maintenance tractors or International rack bodies with hydraulic
tailgates.
> Just administrative vehicles.
> Same as the USMC 2 WD Suburban that was offered on ebay last week. It
> had black out lights added for some reason, but would probably get stuck
on
> wet grass. At least my M1010 does in 2 WD with the stock tires (which are
> branded, literally, ' US GOVT PROPERTY NY ARMY NG')
>
> Here's what the Army TM 9-8000 says:
>
> "1-15. Administrative Vehicles. Administrative vehicles
>
> comprise the standard commercially available vehicles
>
> commonly used at camps, posts, stations, and various
>
> US Government Installations for routine administrative
>
> duties. These vehicles have a minimum of modifications
>
> to adapt them to military service. In some instances, no
>
> modification whatsoever Is made.
>
> 1-16. Tactical Vehicles. Tactical vehicles generally are
>
> defined as vehicles that have been designed and
>
> manufactured specifically to meet the severe
>
> requirements Imposed by combat and tactical operations
>
> In the field. Whereas combat vehicles are defined as
>
> vehicles designed to perform specific functions In
>
> combat, tactical vehicles are designed specifically to
>
> support the tactical play of the operation."
>
>
>
> But you can call it what you like, because it is yours!
>
>
>
> Ronzo
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "roger" <rfrancis@cfl.rr.com>
> To: "Military Vehicles Mailing List" <mil-veh@mil-veh.org>
> Sent: 15 August, 2005 20:33
> Subject: Re: [MV] M designation for Civilian-type military vehicles
>
>
> > So would my 1956 Suburban be considered a CUCV????
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> ===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
> To unsubscribe, send e-mail to: <mil-veh-off@mil-veh.org>
> To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to <mil-veh-digest@mil-veh.org>
> To reach a human, contact <ack@mil-veh.org>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Oct 28 2005 - 23:25:29 PDT