Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Humvee makers dispute Rumsfeld remarks
Seattle Post-Intelligencer ^ | Friday, December 10, 2004 | GEORGE EDMONSON

Posted on 12/10/2004 8:54:04 AM PST by SwordofTruth

More armored vehicles could readily be built, two companies say

By GEORGE EDMONSON
COX NEWS SERVICE

WASHINGTON -- The manufacturer of Humvees for the U.S. military and the company that adds armor to the utility vehicles are not running near production capacity and are making all that the Pentagon has requested, spokesmen for both companies said.

"If they call and say, 'You know, we really want more,' we'll get it done," said Lee Woodward, a spokesman for AM General, the Indiana company that makes Humvees and the civilian Hummer versions.

At O'Gara-Hess & Eisenhardt, the Ohio firm that turns specially designed Humvees into fully armored vehicles at a cost of about $70,000 each, spokesman Michael Fox said they, too, can provide more if the government wants them.

Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind., said yesterday that the companies could increase production of armored Humvees from 450 a month to 550 by February.

Blaming the shortage on a lack of production capacity, as Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld did Wednesday, is "just not true," said Bayh. He said he had told the Pentagon as early as April that more armored Humvees could be built.

"It's essentially a matter of physics," Rumsfeld told the soldiers in his reply on Wednesday. "It isn't a matter of money. It isn't a matter on the part of the Army of desire. It's a matter of production and capability of doing it."

But Bayh, in a telephone conference call with reporters, said the problem was another indication of the administration's underestimation of the risks and demands in Iraq.

"It borders on the naïve," Bayh added.

Yesterday, President Bush led an administrationwide public relations effort to quell the controversy triggered when a soldier sharply questioned Rumsfeld about shortages of armor for combat vehicles in Iraq at a meeting with troops in Kuwait.

In an e-mail circulated yesterday, a reporter for the Chattanooga Times Free Press traveling with the unit whose soldiers challenged Rumsfeld told colleagues that he had collaborated with the troops to formulate tough questions for the Pentagon chief.

But at a White House photo session yesterday, Bush agreed the soldiers' worries were legitimate and said, "The concerns expressed are being addressed.

"We expect our troops to have the best possible equipment."

Bush also said he told families of Marine casualties that he met during a visit to Camp Pendleton, Calif., on Tuesday that "we're doing everything we possibly can to protect your loved ones in a mission which is vital and important.' "

The current monthly production level of armored Humvees is up from as few as 15 in the fall of 2003, said Pentagon spokesman Larry Di Rita.

According to Army figures, there are almost 19,400 Humvees operating in the Iraq theater. Of those, about 5,900 were armored at the factory and armor was added to about 9,100 of them later.

Other vehicles also lack armor. The House Armed Services Committee released statistics yesterday showing that most transport trucks crisscrossing Iraq to supply the troops don't have armor. Only 10 percent of the 4,814 medium-weight transport trucks have armor, and only 15 percent of the 4,314 heavy transport vehicles do.

The Humvee name comes from the pronunciation of the abbreviation of its prosaic military title: High Mobility Multi-Purpose Wheeled Vehicle -- HMMWV.

Woodward said AM General -- a descendant of American Motors that once built Rambler automobiles -- has added workers and increased overtime to meet demand.

The number of large Hummers, which share part of the assembly line with Humvees, has been reduced to a level that has no impact on Humvee production, Woodward said. The smaller Hummer SUV is built in a separate building, he added.

Woodward would not detail AM General's current monthly Humvee production figures.

The Humvees to be factory-armored by O'Gara-Hess have some different specifications than the models shipped without armor, Woodward said. So increasing production requires careful planning.

"It's not like making a Big Mac," he said. "There are so many configurations. ... You can't just whip them through like a big grill in a McDonald's."

Besides having increased the number of Humvees it is receiving, the military is also shifting armored ones to Iraq from other areas, including the United States and the Balkans. An Army fact sheet said 282 factory-armored Humvees are on ships headed to Iraq.

And 10 sites have been established, two in Kuwait and eight in Iraq, where armor is added to Humvees, Lt. Gen. Steven Whitcomb told Pentagon reporters yesterday in a teleconference from Kuwait. According to the Army information, 9,134 of 9,386 add-on armor kits in the Iraq theater have been installed.

Whitcomb said the factory-installed armor provides protection that he described as "a bubble." Add-on armor does not protect the Humvee's top and bottom, he added.

In Iraq, the need for more armored Humvees came to the fore in August 2003 when insurgents changed tactics and started using roadside bombs, Whitcomb said.

"What we also can't lose sight of is that the Humvee was a vehicle that was not designed to afford armor protection, nor were most of our trucks, he said. "The only (factory-armored) Humvees -- the high-end ones -- we had were for our military police forces."

The P-I Washington Bureau contributed to this report.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: armor; humvee; rumsfeld
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-59 last
To: Mr. Lucky
It is possible to improve the mobility that was decreased by the added armor replacing the engine to something more powerful. I remember the Department of Defense have released news about adding new and powerful engines to certain type of vehicles. this will not solve every problem of the heavy mass but the lost mobility by the weight should have recovered at some extent by the replaced engine. I do not know if AM General have accepted my proposal but I have sent them an e-mail to upgrade the engine with twin charger, a combination of turbo charger and super charger for better acceleration at low rotation rate so the engine will push the mass of the vehicle with the added armor. Military vehicles often have turbo chargers but the demerit of turbo charger is that it does not boost enough at low rotation rate, while the super charger will do this. However, superchargers are not perfect so the twin charger will cancel disadvantage of both types of chargers.
41 posted on 12/10/2004 11:28:29 AM PST by Wiz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: TheDon
The conpriazoids have returned!!

Rumsfeld and Bush are sinister, vile, evil, incompetents, who want soldiers to die, or don't care, ignore their commanders, (some say Bush and Rumsfeld hang up when they call)!

They are denying them armor because of the oil, Halliburton, the jews, or...........insert evil motive.

As a matter of fact, they don't even know men are dying, and how they are dying, and don't really care.

Do they even know there is a war?
42 posted on 12/10/2004 11:28:38 AM PST by roses of sharon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Squantos

Yup.


43 posted on 12/10/2004 11:34:42 AM PST by PoorMuttly ("The right of the People to be Muttly shall not be infringed,")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: SwordofTruth

Yes, I'll also admit that I wasn't wordy enough to describe the background and I will apologize for that.


44 posted on 12/10/2004 11:37:25 AM PST by Wiz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: 7.62 x 51mm

I keep wanting to add "villa" "I went home" to your tag line.

Retrofitting vehicles that are already over there is a lot different than producing new vehicles or even retrofitting vehicles stateside.


45 posted on 12/10/2004 11:41:26 AM PST by calenel (The Democratic Party is the Socialist Mafia. It is a Criminal Enterprise.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SwordofTruth

Rumsfeld should be Donefeld.


46 posted on 12/10/2004 11:43:41 AM PST by Lorraine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: roses of sharon

Yep.


47 posted on 12/10/2004 11:47:03 AM PST by TheDon (The Democratic Party is the party of TREASON)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
The reason for that is that the military must be able to accomplish their mission or they will be out of a job.

A job that people must volunteer for at that. Seems to me they don't have to worry about their job, they have the best job security in the entire nation.

48 posted on 12/10/2004 12:16:12 PM PST by SwordofTruth (God is good all the time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Redleg Duke
I guess I needed to be more specific and say, "I've got a BAD feeling that this is the Big One that is gonna bring Rummy down."

Unfortunately, that is the way I feel - the media has been out to get him ever since the start of the war. They didn't get him on Abu Ghraib, they didn't get him on the "missing weapons", but you know as well as I do, these things have a cumulative effect.

I understand President Bush's confidence in him, but this particular issue is being portrayed as an imminent danger to our troops - hits right at the gut.

Sorry if you misinterpreted my post.

49 posted on 12/10/2004 1:07:39 PM PST by Inspectorette
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: calenel

Might get too long for a tagline, c, but I appreciate the thought...


50 posted on 12/10/2004 3:45:03 PM PST by 7.62 x 51mm (• veni • vidi • vino • visa • "I came, I saw, I drank wine, I shopped")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Inspectorette

My appolgies for over-reacting. I think this is going to blow-over as the media is getting more egg on its face as the facts come out. Such as, the reason for the delay in heading north was that the unit was being equipped with up-armored HUMVEEs. A minor "Opps!".


51 posted on 12/11/2004 6:00:47 AM PST by Redleg Duke (Pass Tort Reform Now! Make the bottom clean for the catfish!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Squantos

"Humvee is a jeep replacement.......how many jeeps have been armored up over the past wars ? Zip, nada , none ! "

Bingo!

The intent of the HUMVEE is that of a UTILITY vehicle - that's what the U in HUMVEE stands for. IT was never designed as a "first contact" combat vehicle.

Prior to this go in the desert, the preponderance of armored HUMVEEs were for Militery police (I think that CAV Scouts MAY have had them also, but not sure about that) use only - hardtop, fastback models - fully armored. The remainder were of the utility pickup truck, command vehicle, or medic "cracker box" configuration.

The intent here with this conflict was to "get in, get out, get gone". We now, however, have been drawn into that which we really did not intend upon - that of an occupying force in the midst of an insurgency.

Rummy should just 'fess-up" and say so, instead of blaming industry for operating "At capacity" which as noted above, is a load of crap.


52 posted on 12/11/2004 6:15:16 AM PST by roaddog727 (The marginal propensity to save is 1 minus the marginal propensity to consume.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Redleg Duke
No apology needed - sometimes it's difficult to convey an emotion via keyboard :-)

Anyway, now that the lamestream media has been successful in bringing down Bernie Kerik, the Rummy flap is not gonna be the main story, at least for a few days. Let's hope that during those few days, more of the facts will come out about the armored units.

Even so, they're NEVER going to let up: their ultimate goal is not only to bring down Rummy, Condi, and other administration people, they want to bring down the big guy himself - President Bush. What better way for them to do it than to attempt to turn Iraq into another Vietnam.

The election has changed NOTHING with these vermin. The will of the people means nothing. Their ideology trumps all - just look at this charade that's been going on about the Ohio voting "irregularities". What a parade of losers. That C-Span would even give them air time shows you what we're up against.

53 posted on 12/11/2004 10:12:18 AM PST by Inspectorette
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

Comment #54 Removed by Moderator

To: Inspectorette

I worry about exactly the opposite effect. After the Kerik incident, and seeing that the administration was quick to just let Kerik go and move on to someone else, I think the odds of a Rumsfeld resignation over this armor thing have increased.

when blood is in the water, the sharks are the most dangerous.


55 posted on 12/11/2004 2:23:05 PM PST by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: valuesvaluesvalues

as you can by many of the posts on this thread - Rumsfeld is in serious trouble. if the "faithful" here are willing to buy into "its all Rumsfeld's fault" on this armor issue, then given that we know that the Dems and the media are salivating to get him and destroy the military effort in iraq, he could be gone if even people in the base are buying this.


56 posted on 12/11/2004 2:29:40 PM PST by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: oceanview

The whole issue of assigning blame to the current administration is BS. Defense spending during the 90's was the lowest percent of GDP in recent history and unfortunately the troops are paying for it now. The Dems just nominated a flthy traitor who voted against needed monies for the troops and subsequently they no moral authority on the issue.

Should we cessate any military action until the military is rebuilt after the Clinton dark years? All the readiness reports said that our military could wage a two theatre war at the Clinton force and budget levels. Does anyone believe that to be true?


57 posted on 12/11/2004 2:42:08 PM PST by Wristpin ( Varitek says to A-Rod: "We don't throw at .260 hitters.....")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: skin-n-bones
"You have to admit that, between the poor war plan, mismanagement and torture allegations at Abu Ghraib that Rumsfeld is more of a liability than a benefit."

I don't have to admit that, and I won't. Your comments bely your statement that you are a "Rummy Supporter". You are starting to smell kind of "trollish" to me.

58 posted on 12/12/2004 5:44:03 PM PST by Redleg Duke (Pass Tort Reform Now! Make the bottom clean for the catfish!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: skin-n-bones

Troll Clean-up on aisle 54 please!


59 posted on 12/12/2004 5:48:32 PM PST by Redleg Duke (Pass Tort Reform Now! Make the bottom clean for the catfish!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-59 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson