Talk:RG-31 Nyala

Military Specifics

While the public has the freedom to research the blast resistance of the RG-31 and it's variants, I would encourage that specifics on the blast resistance not be published as this information can be used by forces opposing NATO and the U.S., amongst others. (intelligence indicates it has already been used)

As well, I am a RG-31 gunner and seeing the devestation and the explosives used on another RG-31, I have little doubt that these deaths could have been prevented with the military specifics having not been published online. A main contributor of these specifics, DND101, has recently gone offline. Whether the information is reposted will be left to be seen soon.

My appreciation and thanks to all who contribute to the knowledge of this beautiful and strong AFV.

From Afghanistan, M2

Hi, thank you for the taking the time to register and contribute. I understand you concerns, but you have to appreciate that this is public information and Wikipedia strives for a "neutral point of view" (see WP:NPOV). It is common soviet doctrine to lay mines in multiple configurations: more than 2 on top of one another or several linked togther and it has been since the 70s, because vehicle armor improved. Anyone trained to lay a mine will have this information and apply these techniques. Deon Steyn 07:07, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is it a common Soviet doctrine to lay four TM-52's and command detonate them under a RG-31? "Neutral", public information has cost many lives in this war so far making it a greater challange to stay ahead of insurgent/terrorist techniques.

We must be ever vigilant in scrutiny of posted military information in hopes that it may not be used by opposing forces.

Reguards, --M2austin 20:26, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]