Army Seeks Short-Term Payoff From Future Combat Systems

National Defense Magazine ^ | December 2003 | Sandra I. Erwin

[Have Ruck - Will Travel]

COMMO!

Old Motto: "Death by long distance."
New Motto: "Can you hear me NOW camel######?"

Take care,

Ruck

[archy]

COMMO!

Angry Viking, this is Moonbeam....

DAAAAAAWWWWNNNN-BUSTERS!

Dave? Dave Rabbit? That you, man? 69 Megs?

[Cannoneer No. 4]

WEAPONS OF THE WORLD: Marines Want Their .45s Back

April 23, 2004: The U.S. Marine Corps is looking for a new .45 caliber (11.4mm) pistol. While the American military retired the M1911 .45 caliber in 1985, some commando units still prefer it. This is because the 11.4mm (.45 caliber) bullet weighs twice as much as the 9mm one that replaced it and still has an edge in "stopping" someone hit with it. But the 9mm M9 pistol magazine carries 15 rounds, versus seven in the M1911. The commandos (Special Forces, SEALs, marine Force Recon) counter that their operations are the type where every round counts, and the fewer you have to fire the better. For the regular troops, the M9 has been popular, and successful. The 9mm weapon is lighter, has less recoil and has the extra ammo for users who are not sharpshooters.

The marines want to buy 1,100 new .45 caliber pistols and are having a competition to determine which of several models available will get the $1.9 million contract. The marines have been using M1911s rebuilt from the many old ones turned in when everyone switched to the M9. But even this supply is running out, and it is known that there are newer .45 caliber designs out there that are more reliable, lighter, easier to repair and more accurate. Some marines (and other troops) buy these newer .45 caliber weapons with their own money. Most American combat units tolerate troops bringing in some additional weapons, especially pistols. Some troops have been buying 10mm pistols, seeing this as a nice cross between the lighter weight of the M9 (2.55 pounds versus three for the .45) and the greater stopping power of the 11.4mm M1911 bullet. But there are new .45 models that weigh as much as the M9, carry more bullets (10) and are easier to repair than the M1911.

Afghanistan also raised the issue of stopping power once more, when individual troops went into caves or other tight places, where only a pistol could be used. In these cases, every shot counted, and the guy firing larger (like 11.4mm instead of 9mm) bullets was more likely to win. But most troops agree that any arguments over pistols is minor compared to issues involving all the other more frequently used weapons and bits of equipment. Nevertheless, there's something about pistols…

[M1Tanker]

I'll be at the Armor Conference this year and keep you posted on the non-class stuff. UD is pushing the Thunderbolt hard. Since they used the old AGS chassis and installed the hybrid, the engine compartment is empty. They claim they can put 4 infantrymen or anything else into it. They also say the armor is good vs 30mm at level I (base armor) for 360 deg horizontally. This denotes a vehicle expecting to fight where the enemy can get behind it. I'll hopefully see one at the conference.

The 82nd is now accepting tankers into its ranks, so the AGS may be comming back. Since the 82nd wants a tank/armored gun for infantry support, a light vehicle/big gun is a good combo, especially if it can carry grunts.

I too am concerned about the rush on the vehicle and hope it holds up better than the MGS does, but UD was very upset with the whole Stryker "competition" and is trying to beat everyone else out of the light tank area, so maybe this developement includes the right ammount of determination.... I hope.

[M1Tanker]

I own an IMI M-5 BUL 45ACP pistol. Charles Daily now imports them as the Daily M-5, but they are the same. Basically, it's the 1911's barrel and slide matched with a polymer/metal lower receiver. Very tough and reliable. Magazine capacity is 13+1 for those who can get it or just 10+1. So, fully loaded, its a 45 with one round less than a M-9 (Berretta 92-FS). Since the 45 has a higher PK per round, the lack of a 15th (or even 14th) round is not a problem.

[R. Scott]

How many of those vehicles would survive multiple RPG hits, or take an anti tank mine or a 500 pounder - excuse me, “Improvised Explosive Device”
Anything less would not be acceptable to many, and would still be seen as not protecting the troops.

[R. Scott]

We didn't think there was any threat from landmines

Way back when VC sappers would actually plant mines in the road between convoys. The first one or two would pass safely, the next would be lax and feeling secure.
It doesn’t take long to plant one.

[Voice in your head]

While I can understand a VC sapper being able to pull off something like that in a heavy vegetation environment, we were dealing with thugs in open terrain. More than likely, some Haji saw a patrol use that same turn-around and he planted the mine at night. So, after that incident, our battalion commander had us guarding that highway 24 hours per day. Unfortunately, our area of responsibility gradually expanded. And, there was not enough information flow between companies, regarding lessons learned. So, when we inherited yet another highway to secure, there were already landmines planted there. When we were relieved of our shift, another company rolled in to pull route security for 3 days, while we recovered. They decided to set up their CP in a big patch of dirt, right next to an overpass. I and my NCOs agreed that this was an awful location and we were calling over the net to anyone who would listen that they should put their CP elsewhere. For whatever reason, we were ignored. The incoming company rolled in to the patch of dirt, which my platoon refused to occupy. 30 seconds later, a HMMWV was destroyed by an antitank mine, a soldier had his feet blown off, and another soldier had his ankle shattered.

[FRMAG]

Your number for "Hummers" produced probably refers to the "H2" model which is built on and around an off the shelf GM SUV chassis.

The H2 is NOT built to MILSPEC and can be produced much faster due to its lighter and not to speak of cheaper base.

It needs to be said again that the HUMVEE was designed and fielded as a replacement to the military version of the jeep and it serves admirably in that role. However the hummer like the jeep was never intended to be a front line attack vehicle. Even the uparmored version was intended for use by military police as a patrol vehicle.

In Viet Nam, M151 jeeps were turned into "Rat Patrol" vehicles which were glamorized in an old TV series based on joint US/SAS operations against the Afrika Corps during WWII. Those vehicles were sompletely soft bodied and depended on rapid movement and shock tactics for survival.

Some versions of the hummer have been produced on the same model but again they are soft bodied for speed and manuverability.

The up armored version of the hummer is an overloaded pig subject to frequent breakdown due to carrying weight at or beyond its design peramaters.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

I don't believe any of them are 500 pounder proof.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

The Casspir could probably meet your criteria, except for the 500 pounder

[Ranger]

I seem to recall that in that November post the 3000 production figure was GM H1 hummers in October alone. The point was that we weren't directing production resources to the problem. We've since learned that the problem wasn't production capacity at all as had been stated by Zakheim at a November Armed Services Hearing but a lack of or mis-allocation of funds altogether. PRodution capacity for uparmored humvees is about 450-500 per month without new hires or plant modifications. We have raised monthly producton from low double digits per month to about 200 planned in May and 300 by mid summer. So we're soon to approach 60% of capacity up from around 20-40% presuming the money is allocated which at the moment it is not for a sustained production run at this level. We just flat aren't funding the production to capacity.

[VOA]

bump

[R. Scott]

While I can understand a VC sapper being able to pull off something like that in a heavy vegetation environment, …

Not just on jungle trails. Much of this was in well traveled, open area. It doesn’t take long to plant a mine

For whatever reason, we were ignored.

Something I saw far too much of. People trying to take the easy way, ignoring the reality of the situation.

[SauronOfMordor]

It seems like the troops would be better served on convoy duty to just get an "Executive-protection"-style armored pickup like the one below from IbisTek. The air-conditioning would probably be appreciated by the troops too, as would the internally-aimed .50 cal

[Cannoneer No. 4]

May 23, 2004: Some American troops in Iraq have found a way to protect themselves from ambush; drive civilian vehicles. SUVs (especially white ones) and pickup trucks are very popular with Iraqi civilians. Some Military Intelligence troops obtained civilian vehicles and used them for patrols and missions. The hummers not only stand out visually, but are noisier than civilian vehicles. Hostile Iraqis can hear, and see, the hummers a long way off, and prepare an ambush. This rarely happened when the troops were driving the SUVs. The Iraqis do not like to get too close when they open fire, so by the time the GI driven SUVs were close enough for Iraqis to see the troops, the vehicles were too close for the Iraqis to attack them. Thus the soldiers in SUVs were attacked much less often than those using hummers.

[archy]

Having worked with M1114 in Bosnia and worked at the Directorate of Force Development for the Armor Center (the proponent of this program) I can firmly say that it is a foolish project.

The Scandanvians had the right idea with a SISU, the basically have a COTS bus engine, transmission and suspension and build an armor frame to make a wheeled APC...which is what the Army really needs and is trying to turn the humvee into. By the way, the 6X6 SISU, which has an armored machine gun turret has much more space, capacity and versatility, actually costs less than M1114 both to buy and maintain.

I go back a little further than that, having been involved with the first *new five/quarter ton truck* Phase I XM998 evaluation in 1982- the first ones were shipped without trailer pintle hooks, as the vehicles hadn't yet been approved for field testing of that feature yet. The seats on the current vehicles are MUCH improved over those of the first test units....

The SISU makes for a neat little ambulance, and its commonality with cargo truck axles offers a considerable opportunity for inventory buildup and field cannibalizing when necessary. But then too, the Ford M8 *Greyhound* 6x6 armored car of WWII also shared its mogas engine, suspension and 6x6 layout with military cargo trucks of its era, differing mainly in having its powerplant relocated to the rear of the vehicle.

And there are M8s in service in South and Central America with upgraded Diesel mpowerplants and newer armament systems, sources of the ammo for the old M3 and M6 37mm AT guns being pretty well exhausted after 55 years. But the old wagons still soldier on...until something better comes along.