We ran another MRAP story this morning at Military.com that Greg Grant over at DoD Buzz previewed a few weeks ago.
The military is pressing its case for MRAP-like vehicles that are able to endure the rigors of the kind of terrain found in Afghanistan. This is a smart move on the part of the Pentagon, which is admitting that the current MRAP is a bank vault on wheels and not suited to austere environments where paved roads and structurally sound bridges are not the norm.
The interesting thing about the story though — and something I’d like your thoughts on — is the convergence of the JLTV program, the resulting protest delay and this new urgent need. To what extend is the NorGrum/Boeing/Oshkosh/Textron protest delaying or inhibiting the options for fulfilling this MRAP-ATV request? Seems to me if the players weren’t hung up in protest fights over the JLTV demonstration phase, some of them could offer variations of their JLTV ideas in the near term to the Army — but may instead defer any work on it for fear of disrupting their position in the protest deliberations.
That may be way off, but I’m curious on how that might play into it. Many argue that the tanker protests have disrupted America’s ability to wage aerial combat and operations worldwide. I think that’s a stretch. But in this case, we KNOW that lives are being lost and that something new needs to be fielded fast or more will die.
One of the potential problems the Army has not adequately addressed is that none of the MRAP vehicles are front-line vehicles, in the sense that they cannot operate in an environment approaching mid– to high-intensity combat. They can and do prove useful in stability and counterinsurgency operations, particularly in urban areas that require troops to conduct lots of presence patrols.
But in an environment where an enemy is equipped with large numbers of man-portable anti-tank weapons, of even the omnipresent low-tech RPG-7 variety, these vehicles are not survivable. They dont have the armor protection and are very big targets. While it makes sense in wartime to build vehicles tailored for specific combat environments, one has to wonder if the service has any kind of long term strategy for all these new heavily armored trucks it keeps buying.
This brings up another good point. MRAPs are good against IEDs but not so good against RPGs (I know why and where the vulnerabilities are, but won’t discuss them here). So this new ATV will have to have some of the same armor innovations manufacturers have planned for the JLTV in order to meet the requirement.
It will be interesting to see how this develops and we’ll bring you the latest as we get info.
– Christian
...
” One of the potential problems the Army has not adequately addressed is that none of the MRAP vehicles are front-line vehicles, in the sense that they cannot operate in an environment approaching mid– to high-intensity combat. They can and do prove useful in stability and counterinsurgency operations, particularly in urban areas that require troops to conduct lots of presence patrols.
But in an environment where an enemy is equipped with large numbers of man-portable anti-tank weapons, of even the omnipresent low-tech RPG-7 variety, these vehicles are not survivable. They don
The MRAP is supposed to be a people mover, not an infantry fighting vehicle. The Australian Busmaster fits most of the requirements but to make a vehicle completely RPG-7 proof makes it too heavy for much of the infrastructure in the lesser developed/developing world/ third world shitholes.
As for active systems, try being an accompanying soldier or civilian outside of a vehicle when an active system operates. People are generally adverse to fragmentation wounds.
The U.S. military were forewarned about the need for armouring their logistics vehicles, it was just never done. Maybe because of lethargy, shrinking budgets, they don’t look pretty, they ‘don’t contribute to the shooting war’ and take money away from fighting machines. basically they weren’t part of the network-centric future combat systems army. Sorry but life’s like that.
The GAO has 100 days to make recommendations on the JLTV protests. The 100 days is up around Feb 15. Meanwhile the bids on the MRAP M-ATV are due on January 12. The protestors, should bid if they have candidate vehicles as the protest decisions on JLTV will be out within 30 days after the bids for MRAP M-ATV are due — barring any extensions, which are not forecasted to happen due to the urgency of the program.
This thing IED proof, But is it concussion proof? What happens to the GI’s inside after a 155 goes off under it? (just a little ringing of the ears)? DON’T THANK SO!!!!!!!
“He would rather have nothing now, and wait for something that is not even remotely close to being fielded. “
.
HPC, you have absolutely no basis for your claim. What you wrote came from your fantasy, not from the quote.
You did nothing but defame him.
Thank you Christian & Greg.
This is exactly the kind of discussion that SHOULD have happened before we rushed into buying MRAPs in the 1st place.
MAYBE then instead of a bunch of limited use, over priced “bank vaults” we would have something that could be used for more than just running up & down the roads of Iraq…
Isn’t that what Strykers, Bradleys, et al; are for? Aren’t they APCs? One thing is to make your trucks for your logistics routes resistant to mines and IEDs that are part of a COIN situation, but Afghanistan seems to have devolved into a full combat zone, and that’s exactly what the APCs were made of.
Also, it sounds highly impractical to turn your trucks into mini-tanks, or if that’s the intention, grab the Bradley or the Stryker and make a logistics version of it. Would be much cheaper than shaping the JLTV into a truck version or making an all new model, or so I think.
Last, leave your MRAPs in Iraq and bring everything else to Afghanistan. Your country should have enough power to defeat the Taliban, but so far it seems you guys have been reluctant to use it.
Just my two cents.
Sorry Wes…we’re going to migrate to a much more modern version of blogware soon that will help take care of this spam problem. But I’ll do a better job of deleting them in the meantime.
Do you have/can you give a SIPR url to the info on the RPG issue? Obviously, one would have to have SIPR access to get it, so posting _that_ should be legit. Or just contact me on my email.
Thanks.
I thought putting a wire or similar cage around a vehicle offers good protection against RPGs, without adding too much weight.
Slat armor doesn’t work well if the RPG uses a good fuze. It’s no reliable long-term solution, heavy and bulky.
FRPT’s Cheetah is the answer.
Why is the DoD wasting their time on another competition when they could have had the Cheetah a year ago? Now that the Cheetah has a version with independent suspension and comes equipped to defeat EFP’s what’s the delay? Waiting on Navistar to come up with another inadequate “or equal” version while the guys suffer in the field? Looks like it’s going to be another inquiry after the fact just like it was with the Cougar and the MRAP solution in Iraq. More hand slaps and nothing significant later on. Why is the Army borrowing 400 Cougars from the Marines to use in Afghanistan when all they have bought is the MaxxPro? They will use the Cougars until Navistar can get the MaxxPro Dash to the field, only to find out what their deficiencies are after they hit the field. Tsk, tsk.
Saturday night, my son and 4 others were hit by a IED in Afghanistan. The explosion sent the mrap up in the air, flipping it where it landed on the roof. All men were pulled out of it safely and everyone survived. Whoever designed this, thank you from my entire being for saving our son and men.
Richard
http://www.mobilephone02.com is a Chinese owned wholesale and dropship company located in Shenzhen, China right next to
Hong Kong. Established in 2002, Mobilephone02 was the first ever company to offer electronics dropshipping direct
from the Mainland China market