Skip to comments.Armored Humvee replacement competition
Posted on 03/29/2006 9:42:10 PM PST by Cannoneer No. 4
Set Condition 1 has some info on the contenders: Bushmaster meets the competition in the US
Airborne Combat Engineer notes The Army is looking at off-the-shelf vehicles and asks Why not buy an interim replacement for the Humvee?
Joe Katzman: Hummer Deathtraps Suck: Take 2
UPDATE: I knew I'd seen another good post on the Humvee problem just recently. In an update to his post, Joe K points out Washington Park Prophet's, um, The Humvee Problem.
For the record, Murdoc isn't necessarily down on the Humvee. But Murdoc's down on the fact that our military seems to be reacting in slow motion to this problem.
Yes, the military is a massive bureaucratic juggernaut that's about as easy to turn as a loaded supertanker and I realize that it can't just replace the Humvee overnight. But it almost seems like the decision-makers are waiting it out, hoping that Iraq settles down soon enough to head off a major course change. This, of course, doesn't seem terribly likely to happen in the first place, and it ignores the fact that we'd then be facing our next military challenge with the same Achilles heel. Not to mention the number of lives and limbs lost between now and then.
...insurgent groups around the world are upping the number of bomb-makers in their.ranks... Similar to my position on Marines in Iraq using the lightly-armored Amtrac, I recognize that just up and switching vehicles because of a particular shortcoming in a particular environment isn't generally wise. But this environment is here to stay, as is the shortcoming, so it makes sense to make a few adjustments.
No light vehicle is ever going to be bomb-proof. Some of these IEDs blow tanks to pieces. But a vehicle better-suited to the environment would do wonders for the cause.
Do not forget that every potential enemy is eating the Humvee's performance up. Potential terrorist/insurgent/jihadists are stockpiling IED material as we speak. Just as the US military is increasing the number of special forces operators and snipers, insurgent groups around the world are upping the number of bomb-makers in their ranks, hoping (waiting) for a chance to blow a passing Humvee loaded with infidels to smithereens. You know it's true.
It's called Dingo.
Perhaps we limit recon and scouting in hot zones to Strykers...separating those tasks from general purpose errands and such for existing HMMVW's.
OAS (in South African) produces both the RG-31 and the RG-32. OAS is a wholly owned subsidiary of BAE Systems but General Dynamics has the marketing rights for the RG-31. The Buffalo, produced by Force Protection (in South Carolina) is a derivative of a South African design.
That's very true and very real...but...combat fatigue and road weariness impacts even the otherwise alert motorcycle rider after enough miles.
Which is to say, you can only be alert for so long. When you are alert, or capable of being alert, then being able to bail out has high value. For longer duty, however, you'd better have some small-arms armor protection. You can't forever remain so alert as to avoid getting shot, after all. For the long-term, you need armor.
Understanding the above, it makes sense that hyper-alert Special Forces put a premium on mobility rather than on armor for their hit-hard, hit-fast missions.
But longer-term SOF (e.g. a 2 week sniper mission) will use the armor of camoflage...an option frequently not available to GI's riding on a road in a GP vehicle (hence, the need for some armor).
There is a place for max mobility, minimum armor. There is a place for maximum armor. And most other places require varying degrees of compromises...keeping in mind that historically our casualties have declined as our armor has increased (because people can't be alert 24/7).
Which is to say, you can only be alert for so long.
I still have this thing about being in confined spaces.
12+ lbs of anti-tank exposive, and no one hurt. Pretty impressive
Armored Security Vehicle 131 is a premier platform that is being used for convoy and route security in Iraq. The ASV employs the MK-19 grenade machine gun (turret mounted), M-2 .50-caliber machine gun (turret mounted), and the M-249 5.56mm Squad Automatic Weapon. ASV 131 arrived in Iraq in late June.
Armored Security Vehicle is highly-mobile and C-130 Aircraft transportable. The vehicle's armor is capable of resisting .50 caliber armor piercing rounds and has the capability to deflect up to a 12-pound mine blast. This particular M1117 blew an o-ring in the wheel solenoid and was repaired at Camp Liberty, Iraq, April 5, 2005.
Just found this forum and wanted to throw in my two cents worth about these vehicles. If the idea is to replace the Humvee with a survivable and capable urban assault vehicle, I think attention needs to be given to Textron’s Marine Land System Armored Security Vehicle, Guardian. Looking at the other vehicles the chief design flaw is the vehicles box like silhouette. This would make any of those vehicles more vulnerable to effective impact damage from RPG and similar highly mobile anti tank style weapons. The angled profile of the guardian would deflect (ricochet) a projectile away from the vehicle. The gun turret projects an obvious threat that demonstrates the ability to defend itself while minimizing the exposure of the vehicle occupants to hostile fire. It seems to make sense to me to replace the Humvee, we need to have a quick, light armored vehicle that is capable of operating in a variety of environments and terrains. The Guardian looks like it fills the need to me.
bail out quickly? Thats why we sat on top of the ACAVs and
stowed .50BMG ammo on the floor and sandbagged the driver
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.