I still call BS on the idea that the reserve cannot handle dedicated AFV's like the Alligator or LAV III.
Once again, I will point out the US National Guard only trains one weekend a month, but uses M-1 Abrams tanks, M-2 Bradley IFV's, MLRS and Paladin SP artillery etc. Swedish troops finish thier period of conscription and then are placed in reserve, they undergo two weeks training a year, but can operate CV-90 IFV's and Striv 122 tanks (Leopard 2 A-5 with improved protection and other modifications), and the IDF up to one month annually, although not all reservists are called up on any particular year. Our troops generally train one night a week, one weekend a month and deploy for concentration for @ 2 weeks during the summer, a far greater amount of time than these other reserve forces.
Buying larger quantities of vehicles for the Reserves will increase the pool of skilled operators, mechanics and so on, as well as lower unit costs through economies of scale. This process could also break us free of "managed readiness" by allowing for bulk buys of equipment to ensure that everyone has the equipment needed, so increasing the breadth and depth of the forces as a whole. Modern equipment is far mor robust and easier to service than past generation, so the dedicated full time staff needed to pull weekly maintainence would not necessarily break the bank either.
This purchasing of equipment in penny packets to stay under a yearly budget threshold, and denying the equipment to the Reserve simply increases costs over the long term, and narrows the breadth and depth of the Armed Forces, particularly in the Armoured trade, as George eloquently reminds us.
