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

Skip to comments.

Armor Causing Humvees to Roll Over (Vehicles MORE Dangerous Than Before)
AP ^ | 6/11/06

Posted on 06/11/2006 4:22:24 PM PDT by Mr. Brightside

Today: June 11, 2006 at 16:17:5 PDT

Armor Causing Humvees to Roll Over

ASSOCIATED PRESS

DAYTON, Ohio (AP) - Thousands of pounds of armor added to military Humvees, intended to protect U.S. troops, have made the vehicles more likely to roll over, killing and injuring soldiers in Iraq, a newspaper reported.

"I believe the up-armoring has caused more deaths than it has saved," said Scott Badenoch, a former Delphi Corp. vehicle dynamics expert told the Dayton Daily News for Sunday editions.

Since the start of the war, Congress and the Army have spent tens of millions of dollars on armor for the Humvee fleet in Iraq, the newspaper reported Sunday.

That armor - much of it installed on the M1114 Humvee built at the Armor Holdings Inc. plant north of Cincinnati - has shielded soldiers from harm.

But serious accidents involving the M1114 have increased as the war has progressed, and the accidents were much more likely to be rollovers than those of other Humvee models, the newspaper reported.

An analysis of the Army's ground accident database, which includes records from March 2003 through November 2005, found that 60 of the 85 soldiers who died in Humvee accidents in Iraq - or 70 percent - were killed when the vehicle rolled, the newspaper reported. Of the 337 injuries, 149 occurred in rollovers.

"The whole thing is a formula for disaster," said Badenoch, who is working with the military to design a lighter-armored vehicle to replace the Humvee.

Army spokesman John Boyce Jr. told The Associated Press on Sunday that the military takes the issue seriously and continues to provide soldiers with added training on the armored Humvee.

The Army also made safety upgrades to the vehicle, including improved seat restraint belts and a fire suppression system for the crew, he said.

There are more than 25,300 armored Humvees in Iraq and Afghanistan, he said.

When Humvees do roll, the most vulnerable passenger is the gunner, the soldier who operates the weapon mounted in the vehicle's top.

Gunners were killed in at least 27 of the 93 fatal Humvee accidents since 2001, according to the newspaper's analysis.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; US: Ohio
KEYWORDS: tradeoffs
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-34 next last

1 posted on 06/11/2006 4:22:26 PM PDT by Mr. Brightside
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Mr. Brightside

The law of unintended consequences strikes once again.


2 posted on 06/11/2006 4:26:30 PM PDT by Tennessean4Bush (I would never belong to any club that would have someone like me as a member.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Brightside

I don't see any numbers addressing the issue of people spared because IEDs and snipers failed to kill our troops in these more heavily armoured vehicles. I'd sure like to have seen more stats to back up the original assertion.


3 posted on 06/11/2006 4:29:44 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Hey Senators, what have you done with those Conservatives we sent to Congress? (CyberAnt Inspired))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Brightside

If so, I blame the uproar from the Democrats and their media allies for panicking the Pentagon into doing something without adequate testing.


4 posted on 06/11/2006 4:31:17 PM PDT by expatpat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

going to be hard to document what didnt happen. Perhaps we could take a look at the stats before and after the armor was available. considering the way the vehicles trickled in I don't think there is an easy way to do this.

His premise seems reasonable though. Take a vehicle design and make it much heavier and raise the center of gravity. What else could we expect to happen?


5 posted on 06/11/2006 4:33:39 PM PDT by driftdiver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Brightside
Adding armor in that fashion (all that weight up high) without increasing suspension spring rate, compression dampening and rebound rate is a recipe for disaster.

You can't fight physics.
6 posted on 06/11/2006 4:34:02 PM PDT by taxed2death (A few billion here, a few trillion there...we're all friends right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

You may be right.

But remember how hard the dems hit Bush on this issue?

Wouldn't it be interesting to find out that the main Democratic campaign talking point of 2004 was pure BS?


7 posted on 06/11/2006 4:34:34 PM PDT by Mr. Brightside
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
That would be an interesting comparison.

Me thinks this is just another hit piece masquerading as a 'we love the troops' article.

L

8 posted on 06/11/2006 4:37:21 PM PDT by Lurker ("They still see you as the infidel, the other, and they'll still kill you. " Mark Steyn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
His and your attention to the center of gravity is warranted. Still, what is better, to have the troops sitting ducks or to have an accident once in a while. The per thousand rollover rate doesn't seem that high. The actual numbers of deaths isn't that high considering three years. Each one is tragic, but viewed in perspective this seems like another morale ball breaker to me.
9 posted on 06/11/2006 4:40:38 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Hey Senators, what have you done with those Conservatives we sent to Congress? (CyberAnt Inspired))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Brightside

You mean along with the main talking points of 1964, 1968, 1972, 1976, 1980, 1984, 1988, 1992, 1996, 2000 and 2004? Yeah, I guess so. LOL

In truth, I hear you and agree.


10 posted on 06/11/2006 4:43:48 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Hey Senators, what have you done with those Conservatives we sent to Congress? (CyberAnt Inspired))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

Agreed.


11 posted on 06/11/2006 4:44:08 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Hey Senators, what have you done with those Conservatives we sent to Congress? (CyberAnt Inspired))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Tennessean4Bush

Yes,because they are(Largely)designed to replace the"JEEP"!I would like to know how many of our forces were Killed,Wounded,etc.,etc.,whilst riding in JEEPS in WWII,Korea,Vietnam....I don't think there was any outrage expressed at the time that they were"under-armored"!This is just another avenue for THE LEFT!!!!Tanks(and more lightly armored APCs)are"Armored"vehicles.Hummers are meant to be light,all-purpose transports(Jeeps)!!!!!!!!SHEESHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


12 posted on 06/11/2006 4:47:36 PM PDT by bandleader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Tennessean4Bush

That's what happens when you try to use what is essentially a jeep in a role that calls for light armor. It is the wrong tool for the job.


13 posted on 06/11/2006 4:47:56 PM PDT by wyattearp (Study! Study! Study! Or BONK, BONK, on the head!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Brightside
Damned SUV's. (sarcasm)

Gilda Radner used to say, "It's always something...sweatball on the end of your nose, lint in your belly button...it's always something...".
14 posted on 06/11/2006 4:48:01 PM PDT by FrankR (Don't let the bastards wear you down...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: expatpat

You're Right!Loading up these Hummers with tons of armor-plating REDUCES their survivability because they can no longer Manuever!!!!!!!!!!!!!


15 posted on 06/11/2006 4:49:31 PM PDT by bandleader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

The IED problem needs to be addressed!Beefing up vehicles(Hummers)doesn't get rid of the IED problem!!!!!!!!!!!!


16 posted on 06/11/2006 4:50:59 PM PDT by bandleader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: FrankR
Democrats 2004:

"The administration has done nothing to provide armor for our soldiers in Humvees."

Dems 2006:
"Never mind." (/Emily Latella)
17 posted on 06/11/2006 4:51:11 PM PDT by Mr. Brightside
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Brightside

I don't know. Those suckers have a really really low center of gravity. Not like the old jeep.


18 posted on 06/11/2006 4:57:49 PM PDT by sgtyork (Prove to us that you can enforce the borders first.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bandleader

Yes the IED problem does need to be addressed, but in instances where those IEDs are not direct hits, the armour is very important.


19 posted on 06/11/2006 4:58:16 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Hey Senators, what have you done with those Conservatives we sent to Congress? (CyberAnt Inspired))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

Only if"The Added Armor"doesn't make Hummers MORE vulnerable!


20 posted on 06/11/2006 5:08:50 PM PDT by bandleader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-34 next 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