DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech examines the intersection of technology and defense from every angle and provides analysis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • ‘Canes
  • Af-Cam
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the “Buzz”
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Crazy Ivan
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT’s Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • F-35 Watch
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Bubble with Joe Buff
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • PEO Soldier
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar’s Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples’ Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward’z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » Armor » GENERAL’S UP-ARMOR PLEA IGNORED

GENERAL’S UP-ARMOR PLEA IGNORED

For more than a year, Maj. Gen. William Webster, the head of the Army’s 3rd Infantry Division, had been asking his bosses for the money to toughen up his armored personnel carriers. And for more than a year, his requests went nowhere.
Then, in December, Tennessee National Guard Spc. Thomas Wilson scorched Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld for not armoring up American vehicles. Within days, Inside the Pentagon notes, Gen. Webster’s long-ignored plea was finally answered.

m-113a2.jpgWebsters request for additional armor for his M113 [personnel carriers] had languished at Army headquarters since October 2003, a month after he took command of the 3rd ID, as it is called… The requirement for up-armored M113s was just one of more than 50 operational needs statements Webster submitted at the time…
Initially, the 3rd ID flagged other requirements as more critical than the M113 up-armor effort, sources said. The division was requesting hundreds more radios, machine guns and trucks with the first priority being to shoot, move and communicate when they returned to Iraq, said one Army insider.
But field commanders became increasingly uneasy last summer as casualties mounted in Iraq from ever more sophisticated insurgent tactics. M113s in Iraq were becoming vulnerable to roadside bombs and mines, Army officials say. Its light armor can stop pistol and rifle fire and shrapnel, but thats it, said one.
The 3rd ID commander began pushing in earnest last August to up-armor his personnel carriers, according to sources and documents. His quest met considerable opposition at Army headquarters and at the services Forces Command, where senior deputies argued the M113s existing light armor allowed it agility in urban terrain, and said it should be sufficient against an insurgency that lacks traditional armor of its own, sources said.
The three-quarter-ton armor that gets plated onto the humvees, for example, limits its carrying ability and puts additional strain on the transmission, according to service officials…
In mid-October, Webster officially requested that Army headquarters in Washington approve a $20 million armor upgrade for about 450 M113 troop carriers… In view of the estimated $1 billion being spent for Iraq operations each month, proponents of the up-armoring view it as a relative bargain. The M113 — essentially a box on top of its tracked chassis — is easier to armor-plate than the humvee and can be done at one-fifth the cost…
At this time, the division does not have a viable mix of active and passive add-on armor systems for its combat and combat support vehicles that will help prevent casualties and losses, [Webster] wrote, citing an increasing sniper, roadside bomb, improvised explosive device, mortar, rocket propelled grenade, anti-tank missile, machine gun and small arms threat in theater…
Webster sought delivery of all add-on armor systems [no later than] 15 January 2005, [a] letter states, [when the 3rd ID would be returning to Iraq]…
It was not until a late-December meeting at the Pentagon that the 3rd ID was assured Army support for getting up-armored M113s, sources said. The can do attitude of a new head of force development at the Armys G-8 programs office, Maj. Gen. Stephen Speakes, may have played a role in the shift, according to some officials.
This crazy nonsense is because there was an unwillingness to admit three things: the Iraqi insurgency is a rebellion against the U.S. military occupation, it was steadily worsening, and U.S. soldiers were at serious risk in wheeled vehicles, says retired Army Col. Douglas Macgregor, a former armored cavalry officer who led troops in the 1991 Persian Gulf War.

THERE’S MORE: The number of troops on the ground matters more than what kind of vehicle they ride around in, argues this Knight-Ridder story (via Steve Gilliard). Take the Iraqi city of Mosul, for example, where 5,000 Stryker Brigade troops replaced 20,000 from the 101st Airborne.

The men of the 101st moved around Mosul in Humvees but sustained few casualties, even though some of their Humvees lacked armor.
Conditions in Mosul, however, have gotten worse since the [more heavily-armored] Strykers arrived.
Visiting the town of Hammam al Alil, south of the city, Lt. Col. Todd McCaffrey said the area had become a “planning, bedroom community for terrorist cells “that coordinate attacks in Mosul…“
“We spend a lot of time trying to separate the populace from the insurgency,” said McCaffrey, who’s with a unit of the 25th Infantry Division that deployed to Iraq in late September. “Obviously, when you go from the 20,000 that the 101st had to 5,000, there’s a clear change.“
A steady stream of Army units has been sent to reinforce the troops in Mosul during the past two months, increasing the American presence to some 12,000 soldiers, according to Brig. Gen. Carter Ham, the commander of the Stryker brigade.
“You win this thing with boots on the ground, not by throwing more vehicles at the place,” said 1st Lt. Ed Mikkelsen of the Stryker Brigade.

Share |

January 21st, 2005 | Armor | Comments Off Both comments and pings are currently closed.

« « TRANSFORMATION CHIEF RETIRING | JAMES FALLOWS AND THE JEWEL THIEF » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

Comments are closed.

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement

    Recent Articles
    • Army Fast Tracks GPS Mortar Round
    • That Elephant’s Going To Do What? Where?
    • JSF Costs Jump 50 Percent
    • Let’s Talk AirSea Battle
    • More Vehicle Digital Camouflage
    • Chinese Digi-Camo
    • Defense Spending Headed Down
    • Those Wonderful Sea Lines of Communication
    • Army’s GCV Not Just MGV Warmed Over
    • Cancel Cyber Command
    Recent Comments
    • Let’s Talk AirSea Battle
      On the other hand we can always sign a peace treaty with...
      roland
    • Let’s Talk AirSea Battle
      Just have some countries manufacture some of our (USA)...
      roland
    • Army Fast Tracks GPS Mortar Round
      The biggest issue was not addressed. Cost is big, but also...
      Carl
    • That Elephant’s Going To Do What? Where?
      > This is going exactly as...
      Cranky Observer
    • Army Fast Tracks GPS Mortar Round
      I almost feel bad for the bad guys now,…almost!...
      Shamus62
    • Army Fast Tracks GPS Mortar Round
      Sounds like your over using the Dual Overhead...
      SAAAARGE!
    • JSF Costs Jump 50 Percent
      Lockheed should be forbidden from ever bidding on government work...
      John
    • That Elephant’s Going To Do What? Where?
      This is going exactly as planned. The...
      John
    • Army Fast Tracks GPS Mortar Round
      Byron, NLOS-LS has a range of 40 kms while an M120...
      Cole
    • Army Fast Tracks GPS Mortar Round
      It's about time that infantry get the support weapons...
      atacms
  • Channels:Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty |Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money |Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network:Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz |SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps |Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program |Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy |User Agreement| © 2010 Military Advantage