IMO, either of these should only be considered a partial solution, until they come up with an appropriate armored car/truck.
This is the real point I was going after....a real solution to the need at hand is not, or at least does not have to be, years away. We understand our needs, and if we can skip all of the political BS in the procurement system and congress, we could meet that need quite promptly. We could even get the right vehicle into the field faster than the M1114.
I will say it again, all of the soldiers in my company CAME HOME in one piece because of these armored Humvees.
I'm glad to hear that. But just because they made it home, doesn't mean they had the right vehicle. The M1114 is much better than driving around with no protection, but as armored vehicles go it is weak. Think about the guys standing in the hatch, exactly how much armor did they have? And if they weren't up there, how much situational awareness and firepower did you have?
I have never made the case that the M1114 is inferior to the M998/1025, only that it is not the right vehicle for the task at hand. We are cramming a square peg into a round hole...and we are paying for it blood. We have a new need, something we have never really faced before, for an armored peacekeeping vehicle. We should build one. And just because the M1114 is what we have doesn't mean it is all we could have.
The M1114's you had were almost definitely less than 5 years old, and most likely less than a year old. How do you think they'll be in 5 years never mind 15? I can tell you...they will become a maintenance nightmares. Because they were not designed to have that weight. The most likely failure points have been 'beefed up' but that just means that they will fail later, and other non-beefed up pieces will be the thing that fails sooner.
Did you read my post on the thread I linked? I would appreciate your insight into the COTS point I was making.
Thanks for your service.
Hummers are JEEP replacements!!!!
It AIN'T an APC!!!!