Posted on 06/11/2006 4:22:24 PM PDT by Mr. Brightside
And if it is, then that should be addressed. But I'm not convinced that it is, and this article leaves a lot to be desired in the effort to clarify that charge.
Could be just antoher attempt at assaulting our troops. Dunno, the armored humvee is a stopgap measure anyway, right?
I suspect the weight of the machine gun and the gunner at the very top of the vehicle does more to change the center of gravity than the armor. Also, the ctitic here is trying to sell against the humvee. He has his own vehicle he is saying is superior. He may be right but his perspective should be considered.
I'm certain the center of gravity issue is why the HumVees
weren't equipped with top heavy armor in the first place. I'd also bet the army new this even before they placed an order for the vehicles and I wonder why they didn't speak up when the controvery hit.
Well, that could be. It could also be that the vehicle was not intended to be used in situations where it would be subjected to so much hostile fire.
I could be wrong, but I think it was intended to be used for transportation in relatively non-hositle situtations. The armoured carriers were more targeted for what the humvees are actually being used for IMO.
I don't know exactly how to answer that. Try my response in the post above. I'm not in the military and don't have any inside insight on this.
Don't forget where the complaints were coming from - the RATS. It goes to prove that the uneducated once again open their mouths. It has destroyed the humvees for what they were designed to do.
The day after Rumsfeld announced the "up-armoring" of HumVees, a Bradley was hit by an IED -- with nearly all (15?) troops on board killed.
Thanks. Wouldn't doubt it.
Wouldn't you agree that the armoured carriers are better, or do you have a different take on that?
"It has destroyed the humvees for what they were designed to do."
Nobody ever said that a Humvee was designed to be operated in an insurgency. We've made plenty of mistakes in the past. Blame the Gov't in general. It simply does not change once a design or a model of Military Structure is put in.
Look at Somalia. We used Humvees there and took a hit. 10 plus years later and we are still using them in an Urban environment.
I dunno if the Stryker is the answer or the Lav 25, but we can't expect a OverHauled Jeep to tbe the answer in an Hostlie environment.
Wouldn't you agree that the armoured carriers are better, or do you have a different take on that?
No opinion: My "armoured carriers" floated!
The problem is,how much "armor"can you put on a HumVee and have it still be "Mission Capable"?
why not use a real armored vehicle and ditch the humvee for these types of missions?
If the media weren't doing what they are perhaps we could fight this war like it should be. Then we wouldn't have the long drawn out street battles.
Hit them hard and keep hitting until they die or surrender. If they surrender dont let them out of jail and interrogate them agressively. No whining about a dog barking in their face or panties on their head.
perhaps if we were fighting it that way the whole issue of armored humvees wouldnt exist.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/m996.htm
You would think that these are even more top heavy.
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.