Replace the hopeless Humvee, Pentagon chiefs are urged

telegraph.co.uk ^ | 28/04/2004 | David Rennie

[Destro]

Replace the hopeless Humvee, Pentagon chiefs are urged

By David Rennie in Washington

(Filed: 28/04/2004)

Humvees are proving easy prey on the streets of Iraq

Armoured cars being sent to Iraq are not up to the job, according to a senior United States army general, prompting calls for Pentagon chiefs to swallow their pride and reactivate thousands of mothballed Vietnam-era armoured personnel carriers.

With improvised bombs, rifle fire and rocket-propelled grenades taking an ever deadlier toll on coalition forces, the Pentagon is spending £225 million to replace thin-skinned versions of the Humvee, the US military's ubiquitous jeep-like transport, with an "up-armoured" model, as fast as they can be churned off the production line.

Commanders have shuddered as troops attached home-made armour plating and even sandbags to ordinary Humvees, whose thin skin, canvas doors and shoulder height windows have made them highly vulnerable to attack.

The new, armour-plated Humvees have been touted by Pentagon chiefs as the best solution to complaints from the field about the standard version of the vehicle.

But Gen Larry Ellis, the commanding general of US army forces, told his superiors that even the armoured Humvee is proving ineffective.

In a memo leaked to CNN television, he wrote: "Commanders in the field are reporting to me that the up-armoured Humvee is not providing the solution the army hoped to achieve."

Reports from the field say that even with armour plating, the Humvee's rubber tyres can be burnt out by a Molotov cocktail, while at two tons, it is light enough to be turned over by a mob.

Gen Ellis said it was "imperative" that the Pentagon instead accelerate production of the newest armoured personnel carrier, the Stryker, which weighs 19 tons and moves at high speed on eight rubber tyres.

But the Stryker has many influential critics who say it is too big to be flown easily on the military's C-130 transport aircraft, and too cumbersome to manoeuvre in narrow streets. Instead, they want the Pentagon to turn back the clock and re-deploy thousands of Vietnam-era M-113 "Gavin" armoured personnel carriers, which are still used by support and engineering units, and are held in huge numbers by reserve units.

Gary Motsek, the deputy director of support operations for US army materiel command, said: "I have roughly 700 113-series vehicles sitting pre-positioned in Kuwait, though some are in need of repairs. I have them available right now, if they want them."

[oceanview]

but not all the soldiers are being killed by artillery shell IEDs. a level 6 armored car can stop AK47 fire according to some websites I saw. what do those military Humvees cost the Pentagon? the troops could probably be riding around in an armored mercedes for the same $$$s.

my only point is - for whatever reason (clinton era military budget cuts the most likely culprit), we haven't made any investments in this area for R&D, and we could have done better.

[Palmetto]

Well, hopefully we took out quite a large cache of potential IEDs with the Spectre last night. And I would still like us to set up a Trojan-horse Humvee to lure out the perps.

[archy]

I believe this is one of the M113 vehicles stored in Kuwait in the article.

This is one of the ones sitting at one of the Combat Support Cemters in Iraq. Though it runs, it's being used as a storage building. M113A2 configuration, I believe.

[Darksheare]

'Xactly.

Some have forgotten that there is no such thing as 100% protecton against explosions or projectiles.
Of course, my old unit had the canvasbacks as the Prime Mover and Ammo Vehicle for the howitzers.
Meaning: We had zip for any kind of protection against anything except rain.
The up armored Humvees reduce the injury extent, and reduce the number of injuries.

Yes teh Humvee is a remarkable vehicle, I wasn't knocking it, just owning up to the fact that it's performing it's usual functions in an environment it was never meant to be in.
It is, as stated during my trip through Basic and AIT in 1996, a rear area vehicle.
It does make a platform for scouting from, just as long as you try not to use it for force on force grunt work.

My unit trained to run from confrontation with the opfor rather than try to fight it out from the vehicle or unprepared position.
Once we had trenches and foxholes dug, we fought like badgers from prepared positions.
That's what we trained to do since the Humvee just is not a fighting vehicle.
As a prime mover for light towed artillery it excels.
Trying to use it as a combat transport isn't so good.
Convoys should be protected and shadowed by vehicles and assets designed to fight.
(But that takes soldiers and other equipment from where it's needed to do said babysitting -a bad idea under any circumstance.)

[archy]

Archy, can you post some pics of the currently available 4 and 6 wheeled armored vehicles?

Oh, man! There are literally dozens of both, with the number of variant models and subtypes kicking the number into the hundreds. It might be worth a couple of vanity posts for an archive and spotting guide, helpful for those who spot one in a news photo or clip.

Or as an alternative, maybe we could talk SamWolf into devoting two of his interesting and informative *Treadhead Tuesdays* to the subjects, with maybe a third for 8-wheelers. Oh, SamWolf...>

[archy]

"I have roughly 700 113-series vehicles sitting pre-positioned in Kuwait,

Sounds like the ticket to me.

Why? It won't stop an RPG

Chainlink rolls on the sides and front. In back if we're willing to sacrifice the utility of the back ramp. It'd be at least worthwhile to protect the M113A3 style box fuel tanks above the tracks on the back wall from a direct RPG hit, maybe the ramp area as well.

or 105-155mm based IED either.

The IED that took out the M1 Abrams was three 100-pound warheads from a vehicle-mounted ground to air guided missile. Build a better mousetrap, breed smarter mice.

[archy]

Does anyone seriously think that ANY vehicle is safe driving down the streets of Baghdad?

I wonder how many Iraqi RPG gunners would wing a shot of at this little porker:

[SAMWolf]

Sounds like a good idea. We'll work up something on current Wheeled Armored Vehicles. Like you said though, lots of variants but we could cover the main vehicles.

[SAMWolf]

IMHO, HumVee's are being misused. They were not intended to be fighting vehicles. They were supposed to replace the Jeep and 3/4 ton truck. They offer more protection than the older vehicles but are not tanks, Urban Assault Vehicles or armored cars.

[archy]

Sounds like a good idea. We'll work up something on current Wheeled Armored Vehicles. Like you said though, lots of variants but we could cover the main vehicles.

No doubt the response threads will cover all sorts of spinoffs and obscure goodies too. Let me know if I can assist. I can think of a few sites with some good historical pics, but the quality may be iffy.

[archy]

The New Improved Old Reliable(Infantry Fighting Vehicle Light (IFVL)), with a 25mm Bushmaster Chain Gun, external fuel tanks, and spall shields

A good start. Still amphibious? The M113A1s I was more familiar with were topheavy and prone to roll, and all our drivers were taught how to recover a rolled *bucket* if two other tracks with tow cables were around and a VTR wasn't.

But just in case a platoon/squadron of that Bushmaster augmented Bucket were to meet up with something bigger and meaner than *just* other vehicles of its own class, how about a intirm Fire Support Version mounting the turret from a M551 Sheridan, probably also on that 1 meter/extra roadwheel stretched M113A4 MTLV version.

[Southron Patriot]

Here's another argument against the Stryker LAV & for the M113A3(Infantry Fighting Vehicle Light.

http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/Quarters/2116/wheeledbooboo.htm

"Months ago at AUSA, Gen Shinseki with Secretary of the Army Caldera by his side said the Army will be an all-wheeled vehicle force by 2010. We will become in essence a BRDM armored car motorized Army. Or was it just a signal that the days of the 70-ton "land dinosaur" are over? Analyze the Shinseki/Caldera Press Conference below.....
The 90% support vehicle Air Lift "footprint" Gen Shinseki refers to are the trailers and trucks needed to MOVE and REPAIR and FUEL the HEAVY tracked vehicle force!!!! It is not needed for LIGHT tracks!!!! Don't throw out Light tracks with the Heavy Tracked vehicle bathwater! Are they aware the M113A3 has all the attributes they lust for in a LAV????? M113A3s don't guzzle fuel, break down constantly or need transporter trailers/trucks. And they are not road-bound RPG-kill like wheeled armored cars!!!

Reading his comments you get the feeling if wheels don't work out we fall back to the screwed up HEAVY TRACKED status quo...Wheels or nothing?????"



"Today we have the disaster of rubber tires shredding on take-off and causing an engine fire causing a Concorde airliner to crash and burn, killing over 118 people...SUV trucks with Firestone tires delaminating and falling apart causing hundreds of traffic deaths...AND THE ARMY WANTS TO PUT ITSELF ON SUV WHEELS??????? What are Army leaders thinking when they see the daily carnage on the local news? Or are they living in an ivory tower out of touch with the real world? SUVs have "run flat" tires...and this doesn't stop accidents and deaths in PEACETIME--what makes us think they will survive on armored cars in COMBAT against bullets, shrapnel, explosions, molotov cocktails, broken glass, rubble, wire???? What happened to the many enemy armored cars we toasted/roasted in Grenada, Panama and Desert Storm? Do we need a sign from God Almighty here? Haven't we already gotten it? "

"When Malaysian armored cars were used in Somalia (JFQ, Letters to Editor the Defense Attache from Malaysia reports that 2 wheeled APCs destroyed and 6 of his men were wounded in action (WIA) and 1 killed in action (KIA) from the rescue of TF Ranger...why do we want to employ such thinly armored cars in a combat role?"

"With regard to land mines, a anti-tank mine will likely disable both a LAV and a M113. In fact we found that it usually disabled a M48 series tank and would probably disable the current M1A2 tank. A small anti -personnel mine will blow out the tire of a LAV. In contrast, we used M113's to clear anti-personnel mines by deliberately driving over them. Their detonation would occasionally break the oil sight glass in one of the road wheels or damage the rubber track shroud. I am glad to report that both the sight glass and the rubber track shroud have been deleted from the current M113A3 vehicles."

"A lot of the current leadership misjudging the desirability of wheeled armored cars comes from the make-believe of the National Training Center (NTC) at Fort Irwin, California firm-soil desert. NTC doesn't simulate artillery, bullets debris shredding your tires, so wheels look good, too."

"Many have mistaken the Russians rolling into Pristina, Kosovo unopposed by their allies the Serbs as "proof-positive" that wheeled armored cars are a good thing to have:

Russian marines apply lessons of Chechnya to combat training', Krasnaya Zvezda', 25 Nov 00 BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Nov 30, 2000

Head of the Russian navy's Coastal Troops Lt-Gen Pavel Shilov has outlined the Russian marines' experience in Chechnya and the lessons they have learnt from the campaign. Shilov told the 'Krasnaya Zvezda' newspaper that the experience of fighting in Chechnya had emphasized the importance of training, as well as the need for specialist equipment and new combat tactics.

"We ran into the fact that it does not hold up to such conditions. Particularly the wheels of the armoured transporters. For example, the [armoured personnel carrier] BTR-70 will not run in the mountains, and we are undertaking measures to re-equip the brigades with MT-LB's [multipurpose tracked vehicles]. It would be good to get [infantry fighting vehicles] BMP-3's, but we should not count on this."

"Going to wheels is another step towards a lazy Army/mc that doesn't want to fight (posturing), which requires cross-country travel, but wants to stay comfortable on roads and only occasionally get off the vehicle and walk to do peacekeeping by seperating the combatants. By staying on roads we surrender to the pressures of the "enviro-weenies" and further emasculate ourselves to the on-going societal pressures not to train and warfight. Wheels versus Tracks the study that General Shinseki refers to in his press conference"

Read this and weep.

http://carlisle-www.army.mil/usassi/ssipubs/pubs98/aeromotr/aeromotr.pdf

The SSI "Aeromotorization" report in HTML web-page format


"The Army will listen to Rand civilian think-tankers who FAILED TO DO THEIR HOMEWORK AND OVERLOOKED LIGHT TRACKED AFVS (HELLO 11-ton M113A3, anyone?) and pay no attention to her own Soldiers who have real world practical knowledge and publish BETTER ideas in her service journals! The heavy hand of RAND, a creation of the Air Force to justify stand-off strategic bombing can be seen behind the Aeromotorization non-sense---they see war as high explosives landing on the enemy--One of the author's was a Field artllery type who was involved in the Army's airstrike mentality without airplanes, neither understand ground maneuver or controlling presence on the ground. Wheeled armored cars are to them just means to digitally pass on information for their artillery means to strike at the enemy and win battles just by firepower? All a form of POSTURING not real warfighting. They have offered a vision of disaster for America's Army which since then has been amended, but many leaders still want vulnerable, immobile armored cars.
Read this and cheer! Heroes do live among us. Read former Armor officer and defense engineer Don Loughlin's brilliant expose of the armored car lie:


Tracks better for Army BCTs than wheeled armored cars despite what flawed "SSI Aeromotorization" report says
The SSI report is seriously flawed, and its high time the Army stop gushing over civilians assuming their thinking is "that great" and start empowering and listening to her own Soldiers who KNOW BETTER. What has the Army done to encourage "out-of-the-box" thinking in her own Soldiers? Are not the newly published "Army values" a push for honorless conformity to corruption?"

Sounds like the Stryker is not quite what it seems. A little better protection + more maneuverability in the sands of Iraq is better than a unarmored SUV(HUMVV) or a 8 wheeled monstrosity.

[Gunslingr3]

Chainlink rolls on the sides and front. In back if we're willing to sacrifice the utility of the back ramp.

heh-heh, you could do the same thing to a Hummer, and everyone could just climb out of the top. :)

The IED that took out the M1 Abrams was three 100-pound warheads from a vehicle-mounted ground to air guided missile. Build a better mousetrap, breed smarter mice

So? A 105 or 155mm based IED is still going to eat up a 113, and those are what I was talking about.

[Southron Patriot]

Here's somthing else on the M113A3 Family.

Army's European Immediate Ready Force (IRF)

http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/Quarters/2116/m113a3setaf.htm


2004 UPDATE!!!

IRF-M M113 Gavins Airlanded in closing days of Iraqi Freedom attack Phase

Interesting, check out this article in the last issue of MILITARY REVIEW:

www-cgsc.army.mil/milrev/download/english/NovDec03/barclay.pdf

Seems that 4 platoons of M113s WERE airlanded as part of the Northern Front, along with a platoon of Brads and of Abrams. Would love to see the logistic AAR for that operation. The article also says an inovative e-mail based logistic system located and moved parts to the airhead with a 24 hour turn around time, without moving mountains of stuff to theater. The young sergeants and officers are doing real logistic transformation with the tools they have, without waiting for DA to do it top-driven.

Operation Airborne Dragon

IRTF 1-63rd Armor, 3rd BDE, 1st Infantry Division attached to 173rd Airborne Brigade

MRC
1st Platoon Bravo Company 2/2 IN M113A3 Gavin light AFVs
3rd Platoon Bravo Company 2/2 IN M113A3 Gavin light AFVs

HRC
2d Platoon Bravo Company 2/2 IN M2A2 Bradley Medium AFVs
3rd Platoon Charlie Company 1/63rd Armor Battalion M1A2 Abrams Heavy tanks

FSB and C4I elements

07 April 2003

Ramstein AFB, Germany to Bashur Airfield Northern Iraq 30 x C-17 Globemaster III sorties

SETAF

173d Airborne Brigade

Soldiers Magazine, the official magazine of the U.S. Army, November 2001 issue:

USAREUR's Ready Force

THE Immediate Ready Force was established to improve USAREUR's ability to rapidly respond to potential contingencies within the European Command's area of responsibility.

The cornerstone of the IRF is the Light Immediate Ready Company from the 1st Battalion, 508th Infantry Regiment, in Vicenza, Italy. This Airborne force is deployable within 24 hours and can be quickly reinforced with additional units from SETAF's 173rd Brigade.

The remainder of the IRF is tailored into force enhancement modules that add specific capabilities in the form of combat power, communications, military police, engineers, scouts, and tactical or strategic control assets.

The FEMs can deploy separately or together, based on the mission, to provide a capable, tailorable and integrated force.

Combat power ranges from the Medium Ready Company, equipped with M113 armored personnel carriers, to the Heavy Immediate Ready Company, equipped with M1A1 tanks and Bradley fighting vehicles.

Key to the mobility of the IRF is its ability to deploy using tactical airlift assets already available in the European theater, belonging to U.S. Air Forces Europe. Every IRF FEM is C-130 deployable, with the exception of the HIRC, which requires heavy-lift capability in the form of C-17 or C-5A transport aircraft.

The successful partnership between USAREUR and USAFE, working together to meet the needs of the EUCOM commander, has been an essential part of the development and employment of the IRF.

Also key to the readiness and rapid deployment of the IRF is the prepositioning of equipment at the Deployment Processing Center.

Located at Rhine Ordinance Barracks, the DPC stocks complete equipment sets for the FEMs, maintaining them at a 100 percent readiness rate.

The location of ROB, adjacent to Ramstein Air Base, the primary aerial port of embarkation in Germany's Central Region, helps speed the delivery of IRF personnel and equipment anywhere they are needed. -- MAJ Paul Swiergosz

---

Also enclosed are other articles from U.S. Army Europe and Army Times showing how tracked M113A3s are already being used for an aircraft delivered Air-Mech-Strike capability NOW at a fraction of the cost of new purchase, less-capable LAV-III armored cars, that at 37, 796+ pounds are too heavy for USAF C-130s to airland them at forward landing strips (32,000 pounds is the limit for this) While HQDA "blew it" with the LAV-III as the IAV selection (under protest, hopefully over-turned by Congress when side-by-side testing proves M113A3s not only meet requirements, actually out-performs the LAV-III armored car) for the handful of IBCTs, the rest of the Army can still utilize the superior M113A3 Gavin-type vehicles readily available. Light tracked AFVs like the M113A3 do not need Heavy Equipment Transporter trucks. The Australian Army used M113A1s to take-down East Timor flown in from C-130s last year.
NATO Mobility study proves wheeled armored cars inferior to TRACKED AFVs in cross-country mobility

Someone at SETAF (General Meigs) has had the moral courage and tactical vision to bring back the 173rd Airborne BDE and the modernized M113A3 for a C-130 air-deployable mechanized infantry capability! We salute him for his courage and wisdom. Airborne, Sir!

However, the former wheeled armored car fanatic, Naylor still misses key points in his Army Times article:

1. M113A3s with 1.5 inch thick aluminum alloy armor can have extra applique' armor fitted to repel HMGs, RPGs and autocannons far more protective than the LAV-III/IAV's thin 14mm (1/2 inch) can accept--the bolts are there but the Army has yet to buy the armor panels. The lav3stryker can NEVER be RPG protected or even from small bullets because its entire lower body area where the wheels are at is UNCOVERED!!!! No "applique armor" here because the wheels have to turn to STEER. Those that say the lav3stryker can be made RPG protected are liars. These thin boxes on 8 air-filled rubber tires cannot even be protected from common rifle bullets and molotov cocktails let alone shaped-charge RPGs.

2. M113A3s are newly remanufactured from 1987, not "old" as rubber tire man Naylor insinuates to try to discredit them as a defacto paid hack, "yes-man" for the ruling HQDA wheeled armored car mafia. Naylor prints whatever the army tells him to print unless the circumstances are so obvious he grudgingly has to print the truth. But even then he put in his smart ass snide remarks and subtle digs because he's a civilian easily infatuated with what looks sexy and avant garde.

3. M113A3s by their low-ground pressure and tracked propulsion are far more cross-country-mobile and small-arms fire resistant than LAV-type wheeled armored cars rolling on air-filled rubber tires ever will be...

4. Put rubber, single-piece "band tracks" on M113A3s and they are even more "gentle" on third world country roads for peacekeeping operatiions, they are as silent and vibration free as a truck and lose a half-ton of weight and thus are easily CH-47D helicopter transportable as pointed out in the book;

"Air-Mech-Strike: Asymmetric Maneuver Warfare for the 21st century"


www.geocities.com/air_mech_strike
5. M113A3s can be upgraded with all the FBCB2 C4I digital gear and weaponry the Army needs/wants, transforming the entire Army one battalion in every Brigade, leaving the other battalions with M1/M2s to create a 2-D/3-D maneuver capability at a fraction of the cost that new purchase less-capable wheeled armored cars would cost!




Small Turret or Remote Weapon Station: except for the more compact M113A3 Gavin its could be a powerful 20-40mm autocannon and still fit inside a C-130 for airland or airdrop instead of the pathetic popgun the lav3stryker shoots (when it works)


Buttoned-up Squad Leader TV display


P900 Applique Armor (see photo at top of this web page)

Band-tracks


The question is WHEN will the rest of the Army, realize this?


"The Americans will always do the right thing... After they've exhausted all the alternatives."
-- Winston Churchill

Maybe after some lav3strykers murder some of our men?

www.kforonline.com/news/reports/nr_07sep00.htm

[Elsie]

while at two tons, it is light enough to be turned over by a mob.

Not if it's MOVING!

[Gunslingr3]

tell me why you can buy an armored mercedes or BMW right now, but our soldiers are riding around in these humvees?

Can your armored mercedes or BMW stop a 105mm or 155mm shell blast? How much ground clearance does it have? How steep an embankment can it climb?

Maybe we just need to send a Secret Service detail over there and let the troops patrol from the presidential limos, I'm sure that's the ticket...

[Thinkin' Gal]

There's always the Beastmobile:

The Army's new Smar Truck lll concept, designed for America's homeland security, or for use in a war zone, sits outside Cobo Center March 6, 2004 before being put on display for it's March 8 unveilling at the Society of Automotive Engineers 2004 World Congress. Built in partnership with International Truck and Engine Corporation, the vehicle showcases the latest in armor protection, and detection and deterrent capabilities. Smar Truck lll is equipped with a weapons station module featuring a remote controlled .50-caliber machine gun which rises from the back of the vehicle and has sniper-detection directional sound capabilities. REUTERS/HO/Rebecca Cook

[oceanview]

not all the troops being killed are by 155mm shells. The technology exists to protect from small arms fire.

[BJClinton]

Welcome to Free Republic.

[Imal]

The HMMWV was never intended to be an armored personnel carrier, and should not be substituted for one. In its designed-for role, it is an excellent and field-proven light combat and utility vehicle. But it is not, and can never be, a safe conveyance in a hostile urban combat environment.

Anyone who has seen what an RPG can do to an M-113 APC would never suggest sending our troops through the streets of Fallujah in one, either. The implication of that in the article makes my blood boil.

I am not convinced Bradleys or Strykers would be a much better option in urban combat environments characterized by RPG and IED ambushes.

The truth is that we do not currently have an armored personnel carrier suited to modern urban combat environments like those found in the cities of Iraq.

Until we change this situation, we will continue to suffer more casualties than we should.