Armor shell games & body bags

WND ^ | February 4, 2004 | Tom Marzullo

[Cannoneer No. 4]

When did the Japs stop using kamikazes?

When the Emperor told them to.

EMPEROR HIROHITO'S BROADCAST TO THE JAPANESE PEOPLE ON SURRENDER

A big reason we have roadside bombers and mad mortar men now is that we did not kill enough of these . . . Saddamites last spring. Precision guided munitions and oversensitivity to collateral damage and "civilian" casualties has led to a situation in which the conquered population does not consider itself conquered and lacks the requisite fear and respect. We went to consider effort not to kill as many Iraqis as possible. Our forbearance has not been well rewarded, but what can we do? Americans are the good guys. The only people the Yankees ever got truly medieval on are Indians, Confederates and Filipinos.

This should be the expectation every time we put our soldiers, airmen, seamen, and marines in harms way – that when we are finished kicking their butts, we get our way.

I sympathize with the sentiment, but that ain't the way things work in the real world anymore. We don't do total war, we don't get Congress to declare war, we don't fully mobilize our labor force and manufacturing capacity, and we don't whip the crap out of anybody so bad that the next two generations are complete pacifists.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

Ping to Post 81

[carl in alaska]

bumparooski....

[archy]

The only people the Yankees ever got truly medieval on are Indians, Confederates and Filipinos.

The Marines in the Pacific who rathunted the Japanese from Island to Island would be another example, though the Japanese surrendered soon enough once they found out that we were indeed willing to dish out to their home islands population what the Japs had done elsewhere. And in August of 1945 we made that point particularly clear at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

I knew a few Marines from those days, and could never quite put my finger on what it was that made them a little different from those who had fought in Europe, like my dad. But now I know.

-archy-/-

[PattonReincarnated]

>> I sympathize with the sentiment, but that ain't the way things work in the real world anymore.

Personally, I think the US is in the situation to define what the real world is. Apparently our enemies already think we do. They don't like American capitalism and culture. They think that we force our businesses and culture on the rest of the world. I don't agree with our enemie's view of America forcing itself on the world - business only survive if customers come and buy our products. They certainly like our culture - dispite their protests, and mine for that matter. American culture via music, film, etc. is a major export to the world - and they eat it up readily.

But if they are willing to believe we force ourselve on them that's all for the better. It simply makes it is a whole lot easier to force what we want as a nation on to them. A good chunk of the world already thinks we define what the real world is - and we should step up to the plate and act like the leaders that we should be. We define the terms, especially to our enemies.

>> We don't do total war, we don't get Congress to declare war ...

We also don't teach history in our schools any longer. Most people have no idea what total war is about. The closest thing that they saw of it was in the first Gulf War when we hit the Iraqi's in retreat from Kuwait. How many people think it is unfair to attack a retreating enemy? This would make a great Jay Leno on the street question. Bush 41 lost his guts back then when the images started flowing in and the *kind* American people saw what war really looks like.

The lesson to be learned here is simple. War is ugly. It is the last resort. But by doing war right you don't have to do it as often. Like you said, "we don't whip the crap out of anybody so bad that the next two generations are complete pacifists." I'll add that it may last even longer than two generations with the Japs. We should have never let their security folks (military - haha) into Iraq. The Japs might get a taste for it again. By the way, I'm not big on coalitions - and history teaches good lessons on that as well.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

Horrifying. There is a part in there about Okinawan mud mixed with blood and body parts that made me ill.

I didn't include the Japanese because nearly all of them that our guys went medieval on were soldiers and sailors.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

Horrifying. There is a part in there about Okinawan mud mixed with blood and body parts that made me ill.

I didn't include the Japanese because nearly all of them that our guys went medieval on were soldiers and sailors.

[TomasUSMC]

Getting Medieval.

We certainly are not getting medieval on Iraq or Afghanistan. And I tell you, what we have done is taken the high moral ground. The high moral ground differs though, from the high mortal ground. You don't always win the body count holding the high moral ground. Today our troops are sacrificing themselves to defend the civilians of the enemy, while rebuilding the enemy's country, WHILE being under fire. Unprecedented in History. God Bless America.

And yet we do it because we can. In the case of Iraq, our enemy is weak, we outnumber them, we have superior firepower, and there is no other country bordering the region that comes up even to our ankles. But does this compassionate conventional combat strategy deter or encourage future enemies.

What will our response be to a dirty nuke or real suitcase nuke explosion over Manhattan killing 300,000 Americans? Will we still use this conventional strategy? If so what country will we attack. With what troops? Have we painted ourselves into a corner for future military response. Will there be an expectation of minimal civilian loss of life irregardless of our losses in protecting them? Will our leaders feel they have to follow the precedence set in these bloody days?

Do these losses day after day, become the necessary payment for spreading Democracy? Is Democracy the ultimate defense against the ultimate weapon?

If we look at Germany and Japan in WWII, both countries had radical rabid populations. The Nazis were baking millions in ovens and the Japanese were just slaughtering Asians and attacking in suicidal waves. Democracy cured those malignant cancers. But not before the tumors were ripped out and stomped on, shredded, burned and blown to hell. Nazism and Japanese Militarism.

In Iraq we have Islam. Until we get rid of Islam like we did with the tumors that were controlling German and Japanese minds, all our compassionate bleeding and rebuilding and whatever else - will be wasted. You just have to look at Turkey. That country is democratic and they voted in a most democratic way, to not allow our 4th Division to attack from the North. Something that would have shortened the war significantly.

A Democratic Islamic Republic did, without losing one man or firing one shot, what the Iraqi military could not do in two wars. It stopped an entire U.S. Army Division,( the most modern one at that!)

In Islam there is no separation between church and state.

Islam only coexists with Islam. All other religions must be submissive to it and pay a submission tax.

Compassionate Conservatives beware, or you too will be on your hands and knees praying 5 times a day.

Time to get Medieval on them before they get to where they can on US.

No Borders No Vote.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

It is not too much to ask that effective body armor and vehicular protection be provided in a timely manner.

Define "timely." This country is not mobilized for war. Production of civilian vehicles has not stopped in order to convert every vehicle production line in the country to making tanks and trucks and half tracks.

If in WWII we can produce 40,000 Sherman Tanks, it seems well within our power to make an incremental 2000 armored humvees and a few thousand retrofit kits within a few months.

It doesn't seem well within "our" power to me. Our ability to manufacture 40,000 tanks 60 years ago has nothing at all to do with AM General's and O'Gara-Hess' ability to crank out M1114s in 2004. Does Teddy Kennedy advocate expropriating all Hummer H1's and forcing all the vehicle armoring companies in America to armor them? That's what it would take.

Last spring most units that were authorized M1114's had them. A lot of thought goes into Tables of Organization & Equipment. That's why tank companies have tanks, mechanized infantry companies have Bradley Fighting Vehicles, combat engineers have armored personnel carriers, and field artillerymen have self-propelled howitzers. When you require all these soldiers to dismount from these armored vehicles and serve as constabulary troopers, they are going to want constabulary armored vehicles. Just because they want them doesn't necessarily mean they should get them. We cannot afford to provide an air conditioned armored limousine for every three soldiers in Iraq, nor does it make military sense to attempt it. Armor is not always the answer.

There are alternatives to the M1114. Why are none of them being pursued? Perhaps because actually solving the problem would deprive one political party of a club with which to beat the administration?

[archy]

I didn't include the Japanese because nearly all of them that our guys went medieval on were soldiers and sailors.

Talk to those who were there through that war's last 18 months, and I think you'll find that they found very little to distinguish between civilian and military through that period. But note that in many instances, as on Okinawa and Tinian, the American Marines who took no chances were still more benign than the Japanese military was to their own people.

The lowest estimate of the number of civilians killed on Okinawa was 42,000. And before it was over, More people had died during the Battle for Okinawa than all those later killed during the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

-archy-/-

[archy]

There are alternatives to the M1114. Why are none of them being pursued?

Unfortunately, they are, and it looks like we're in for another round of the M880 and CUCV debacle.

If those civilian vehicles are used to temporarily replace the Humvees and other tactical vehicles sent to combat zones after having armor packages, well and good. But if those vehicles are purchased instead of additional M1114 Humvees, with the choice in the field being limited between unarmored militarized civilian vehicles or Strykers, we're in trouble. And if those civilian-with-green-paint vehicles start turning up in combat zones, watch out.

GM Reveals Hybrid Military Pickup to Army

January 10, 2002

Truck Trend

General Motors Corp. and the U.S. Army revealed a diesel hybrid military pickup truck equipped with a fuel cell auxiliary power unit (APU) that could become the model for the Army's new fleet of 30,000 light tactical vehicles by the end of the decade.

The diesel hybrid improves Army fuel consumption by 20 percent over conventional diesels, reduces emissions and provides troops with clean, reliable electrical power. These are crucial elements in helping to transform the Army into a lighter, more mobile military unit. And with fuel transportation costs reaching up to $400 a gallon depending on training or battlefield operations, the taxpayer savings could run well into the millions of dollars.

The fuel cell APU would replace the loud engine- and battery-based stationary generators the Army now uses for field power, thus enhancing the Army's "silent watch" capability, or the ability to operate undetected by the enemy. Fuel cells are much quieter than engine generators and do not give off as much heat, making them less likely to be picked up by enemy heat sensors. The fuel cell unit also familiarizes the military with the next generation of commercially developed fuel cell technology, so that military vehicles could be powered by fuel cells within the next 10 years.

GM unveiled the heavy-duty, militarized version of the commercial Chevrolet Silverado crew cab in a ceremony with Larry Burns, GM vice president of research and development and planning, and U.S. Army Major General N. Ross Thompson III, commanding officer of the Army's Tank-automotive and Armaments Command.

"Our prototype truck incorporates advanced diesel hybrid powertrain technology and introduces the military to the flexibility and security of fuel cell electric power," Burns said. "This defense project is a great opportunity to put large numbers of diesel hybrids and stationary fuel cell units in operation in the interest of national security.

"We also anticipate that it will accelerate cost-effective and durable civilian applications of hybrid-electric vehicles and fuel cells. As an early customer, the military will help drive down costs, increase our learnings, and spur the eventual development of a hydrogen-based economy."

The vehicle was designed and engineered by GM Military Truck Operations, based in Troy, Mich., and incorporates technologies from Allison Transmission Division of General Motors, GM's Fuel Cell Activities organization, and GM's strategic fuel cell alliance partner, Hydrogenics Corp., based in Mississauga, Ontario.

The Army will evaluate the prototype before establishing performance and procurement criteria and opening the bid process. The Army is expected to want 30,000 hybrids by the end of the decade.

"The potential for fuel cell and diesel hybrid technologies are of critical importance for the Army's next generation of tactical vehicles, and General Motors will play a key leadership role in the research and development efforts for transforming the Army's mobility," said Dennis J. Wend, director of the National Automotive Center, coordinator of the U.S. Army's collaborative vehicle research and development.

"In order for the Army to win today's and tomorrow's battles decisively, we must transform to a lighter, more mobile, more fuel-efficient Army, an Army that is rapidly deployed and sustainable anywhere in the world. The fuel cell auxiliary power unit's quiet operation and low heat signature also are vital elements in reducing the visibility of a deployed force."

GM has a long, proud history of serving the U.S. Army's transportation needs. The automaker has produced about 80,000 military vehicles since the mid-1980s.

The truck's military features include Raytheon First Responder command and control equipment, infrared night vision camera, and GM's "extreme mobility package" to meet the harshest off-road conditions and payload requirements.

"The Army owns a lot of trucks - nearly 250,000 of them, which makes it one of the largest fleets in the nation," said Wend. "Three of top four fuel users in the battlefield are trucks. That's why we need to bring the best and brightest from industry, academia, and government to engage in significantly increasing the fuel efficiency of the our military and commercial fleets."

The heavy-duty, four-door pickup is powered by a 6.6-liter Duramax Diesel V-8 engine, which generates 210 horsepower and 545 lbs.-ft. of torque. The engine is mated to a parallel hybrid electric system for improving urban engine emissions and fuel economy. The system itself can increase fuel economy 25 percent to 40 percent over conventional gasoline trucks.

The hybrid system, under early development by GM for commercial applications, uses a patented split power continuously variable transmission (CVT) with integral electric motors and an energy storage system, to deliver power efficiently to the wheels. The lightweight nickel-metal hydride-based energy storage system weighs a third less and is half the size of lead-acid battery storage systems.

In addition, the diesel-electric hybrid powertrain can operate as a self-contained generator, with the capability of providing up to 30kw "exportable" DC and AC electricity for troop operations in the field. This eliminates the need for separate, less efficient, bulky motor-generator sets typically used.

The fuel cell APU, designed and built by Hydrogenics, is a 5-kilowatt proton exchange membrane (PEM) regenerative fuel cell system capable of producing electricity and hydrogen in remote areas. Today's Army uses extensive surveillance and communications electronics to accomplish its missions on tomorrow's battlefields. These electronics must be powered quietly for long periods of time in a manner that is undetectable by the enemy.

When the vehicle is driven, the PEM electrolyzer uses diesel engine provided electricity to break down water into hydrogen and oxygen, with the hydrogen stored for future use. Later, with the engine off, the stored hydrogen, together with oxygen from the air, is fed to the fuel cell to produce electricity, returning the pure water as a byproduct, which is stored to repeat the cycle.

The regenerative APU thus produces its own hydrogen and the Army does not need to add a new logistics fuel. Any additional water is not a problem since water is already provided to the troops and, in a difficult situation, the fuel cell-produced water is drinkable.

The only sound produced is that of quiet air intake fans, making it perfect for use indoors, in confined spaces or where minimal noise is required. In addition, the fuel cell generates power at relatively low temperatures, removing the risk of enemy detection by heat monitoring devices.

"The fuel cell unit delivers the same amount of power as a conventional generator without broadcasting your presence," said Burns. "The energy density of hydrogen and the efficiency of the fuel cell gives the same capability of equal-sized batteries but with six to 10 times longer operation, particularly in adverse temperature conditions. The military recognizes these advantages as being key to its mission-critical operations."

Military applications require absolute reliability and durability, said Hydrogenics president and CEO Pierre Rivard.

"This is a valuable opportunity to demonstrate the capabilities of a fuel cell system in what are sure to be very demanding conditions," Rivard said. "We always derive significant learnings from opportunities like this and rapidly channel these learnings into our product development initiatives. In this way we ensure that when it's time to start producing this fuel cell technology in larger volume, it is in fact the current best available technology."

The diesel hybrid truck is one of eight different militarized prototypes based on the Silverado that GM Defense will deliver to the Army later this year as part of the Commercially Based Tactical Truck (COMBATT) program. The program leverages commercial technology to reduce the cost of developing and acquiring a light tactical vehicle, and provides the Army with continuous technology improvement.

[Ranger]

As to the armored humvee problem in Iraq and Afghanistan, it could be solved with existing capacity with both sole-source providers alone within 5-6 months at most. The backfill needs for the national guard and other theaters that have been stripped of vehicles could be solved with six more. It will cost no more to get the problem solved quickly in direct dollars than to let the problem fester and more when you factor in that we will likely take 200-500 more KIAs of the next 18 months under the current production plan.

The mission and armament requirements of the military changed as Shoomaker has pointed out. Most units that were authorized had them last year is true only if you ignore the national guard that never got 2800 of their 3000. Also the needs have changed over the last year as we are painfully aware.

I totally agree with you about using alternative vehicles but for reasons I simply don't understand it isn't happening within the army.

Production of retrofit kits could be resolved within a few months, not a year, if multi-source contracting were used. That is how the body armor problem was resolved. The army went from 1 to six vendors.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

CENTCOM up-armored Humvee requirements being met

WASHINGTON (Army News Service, Feb. 6, 2004) -- Despite the misconception of some members of Congress and the media who have raised the issue in recent weeks, the Army is meeting Central Command’s requirements for up-armored Humvees for operations in Iraq and doing it in a timely manner, according to Maj. Gen. N. Ross Thompson III, commanding general for the Army’s Tank-automotive and Armaments Command.

Shipments [of Armor Survivability Kits] are about two weeks ahead of the delivery schedule agreed upon with CENTCOM, Thompson said, and we expect that trend to get even better.

[Ranger]

Thanks for the post. I missed the article until you tagged it. I think in the field the article is called a puff piece. It was written by his department (note bottom reference) and says essentially its not my fault because we didn't get the purchase request from Centcom and now Centcom has agreed to take what we produce because they miscalculated the need last year. Of course this is at odds with Centcom statements in Nov-Dec. about their immediate need. So be it. Based on these numbers armored humvee needs will be filled by summer 05, the 5000 retrofit kit is for the year not the total request of 8300 and if the depots are making 1000 every 3 months then we are about a year to year and a half out on it. Then there are the 3500 odd trucks to kit as well but they almost certainly won't be addressed until 05. Also the fact that just about every unit has been stripped of armored humvees around the world to fill the gap in production isn't mentioned.

I would have preferred this General to say we got the request for production late, we are meeting our stated schedule and we will far exceed it within months by bringing in private contractors and pushing our primary contractors all out for 6 months until the problem is solved. I would be standing on the table cheering if he did that. Instead we will take several more hundred casualties over the coming months that just didn't have to happen and the general uses his PR folks to resolve his perceived problem of PR with Congress. I wish he would see the problem as one of production and get on with it. This is a fixable problem and he can fix it.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

!

[optik_b]

That is no military vehicle, it looks like a repainted Chevy Silverado. What a joke.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

You don't think the Army uses pick ups?

[Cannoneer No. 4]

ping