Iraq death spurs push for Humvee armor

Boston Globe ^ | 3/8/2004 | By Ross Kerber,

[Xipe]

In the days before his death, Private First Class John D. Hart called his father to tell him how unsafe he felt riding around Iraq in a Humvee that lacked bulletproof shielding or even metal doors.

It would be the last conversation Brian T. Hart would have with his 20-year-old son. On Oct. 18 near Kirkuk, Saddam Hussein loyalists ambushed his son's Army convoy, killing two. A hail of bullets felled the Bedford High School graduate while he fought from his Humvee.

[dirtboy]

It's amazing how this article appears in the Globe right after John Kerry attacked President Bush for not properly equipping the troops for Iraq. I'm sure it's just a coincidence.

[Agnes Heep]

There's only one thing worse than having men die for their country, and that is having no men who will.

[2banana]

Heavily armored Humvees (or up-armored) are great if you are on decent or paved roads. They are terrible on bad or muddy roads. They break down more often (due to weight), carry less and easily get stuck. There needs to be a mix and use the right tools for the right mission...

[Cannoneer No. 4]

ping

[Ranger]

The coincidence is that the FY 05 budget was released last month and congressional hearings on the topic were going on all last week. The best course of action is to fund this stuff, get it done now and off the table. This has bipartisan support and should be resolved now. Sec. Brownlee admitted the shortcomings and has asked Rumsfeld for the funds. Rumsfeld needs to get this done as a couple hundred kids can be spared if funding action is taken now instead of after elections.

[armymarinemom]

well said. Bump.

[Indy Pendance]

Asking for funds and getting them are totally seperate issues. This armor thing was debated in the house and senate. Approvaved no thanks to the democrats. Apparently, it's stalled in manufacturing. Which is typical. I worked f or the big three automotive manufacturing companies. I can only image the hoops government manufacturing encompases, it has to be ten times as silly. It's got to be a mess just getting through the paper work let alone getting a product to the customer (our soldiers)

[Cannoneer No. 4]

The US made the wrong plans for Iraq. We didn't have enough allies. We didn't have the "right" allies. We used too few soldiers. We didn't use the "right" soldiers. We didn't find the WMD (yet?). We didn't plan "right" for the occupation. We didn't anticipate the looting. We anticipated too many starving refugees. We didn't pick the "right" people for the CPA. We didn't schedule elections fast enough. We scheduled elections too fast. We spent too much money. We didn't spend enough money in the "right" places. We killed too many civilians. We didn't impress upon the Ba'athists that they lost the war; i.e., we didn't kill enough of them. We didn't spin gold out of straw--oh wait, that was Rumplestiltskin.

[Ranger]

Its not stalled in manufacturing. Manufacturers can make around 500 uparmored humvees per month. I think this month we made 120 and may get to 220 by May. Current funding will allow 220 through Sept. and then it drops to 45 per month. It hard to get to 4100 not to mention 11,000 as Shoomaker stated the total need at that low level. The problem is that Brownlee now recognizes the need and the production capacity which he is prepared to drive to 450 per month indefinitely but Rumsfeld is sitting on the money. He's trying to stretch the $87 Billion through the election and then ask for $50 Billion. We need to stop playing with our soldiers lives and buy what needs to be bought now, save several hundred kids this year in the process from needless injury or death and fight our enemies. This shouldn't be an election issue but it will be if its left unattended to by the end of this month.

[centurion316]

I know that there is lots of finger pointing going on, some quite appropriately being aimed at politicians and at bureaucrats. There are good reasons for both armored and unarmored HMWWV's. The armored versions have reduced mobility, handling, and cargo carrying capabilities. The unarmored versions are not suitable for the combat operations that we are executing today. We didn't have as many of the armored versions as we needed.

Know this: despite what is going on in the budget squabble and all of the political posturing, there are Army agencies that are procuring armor kits off budget and are delivering them as quickly as possible into theater. I know people who are working unbeliveable hours to get these into theater and installed on vehicles. BTW, this isn't the only thing we are doing to combat IED's. Most of these you will never read about, but they are making a difference.

[McCloud-Strife]

Isn't it funny that John F'n Kerry voted against the $87 billion for the troops in Iraq, several million targeted at up grading the armour of the troops and vehicles. The man has the nerve to attack the President for not protecting the the troops enough, when he would not even lift ONE finger is not amazing as the press not reporting this.

[Indy Pendance]

"We need to stop playing with our soldiers lives and buy what needs to be bought now"

Not we, the democrats who stall bills in the house and senate. See this and this for additional information on who voted for these bills, also, read the thread, gives lots of additional information on how the democrats tried to prevent this from happening.

[Pharmboy]

Last week I was on business with a West Point graduate who was an infantry commander in Desert Storm. The most surprising thing he told me was that an RPG could go through a Bradley Fighting Vehicle.

[Ranger]

Your right much is being done especially the matters not talked about on IEDs. Most humvees shouldn't be armored permanently anyway, but retrofited as needed. There are retrofit armor kits in production for about 5000 over 12 months, perhaps 6000. That about half the need if you count the trucks as well and about twice as long as is possible if the other private vendors are brought into the fray. The manufacturers though aren't nearly being tapped and there is no real reason why the bulk of the business is stuck with a few vendors and government houses. It stumps me why the armored humvee production hasn't been gunned 10 months after the insurgency started. We're just talking about that much money. What are your thoughts? Brownlee made his support for full production known last week, but the money seems to be stuck at the very top and time is ticking.

[Ranger]

Yes I agree with you. I don't think Kerry has a leg to stand on based on recent performance. The $87 billion didn't have much if any for armored vehicles by the way as Kerry's apologists point out. Most of the body and vehicular armor was added by congress. In fact if memory serves the administration hadn't budgeted body armor beyond normal procurements. So you won't finding me cheering for many folks right now on this matter. The fact is though the FY05 budget issued last month by Bush has $0 for retro armor and only 818 armored humvees. That's nuts. An insurgency might not have been forecast but 10 months into it its pretty clearly negligent to postpone the obvious actions needed to protect our men and women.

[centurion316]

I think that much of the answer lies with pure bureaucratic inertia. The acquisition system is impersonal and impervious to the urgent needs of soldiers in the field. While it is frequently the target of Congressional attack, in many ways it is also the perfect creation of the Congress. The system has been built to be responsive to the priorities of politicians, not the priorities of soldiers. The system is well and truly broken, I have seen many good and well meaning men try to change it without much result.

Another factor is the requirement for a safety release for any and all items of materiel put in the hands of soldiers. Hard to argue against this one. How would we explain putting an armor kit on HMWWV's that reduced IED casualties, but that increased deaths due to vehicle accidents caused by the effects of the armor kit on the vehicles safe operation. The folks that do the safety testing have more to do than they can handle. This is one of the reasons that the number of vendors for armor kits has been kept low - can't possibly test every vendor who has got a product to hawk. Some of the safety testing procedures could be streamlined, but the lawyers are fighting against it.

[Ranger]

Thanks for your thoughtful comments. The safety releases must certainly apply in a combat zone wouldn't you think? In the worse case scenario which I feel we are in right now, the lack of a timely official option for the men in Iraq has resulted in numerous home grown versions which would likely never pass much less see a safety test, but beats a cotton t-shirt.

I tend to buy all your points and would appreciate any thoughts on jump starting this process as the recognition and resolution of this issue will take nearly as long as it took to fight half of WWII. Heaven help us if we were in a major war.

[xone]

An RPG is an anti-armor weapon. It is supposed to be effective on armored vehicles.

[Pharmboy]

Yeah...I know that now. It just surprised this (non-military) guy when the infantry vet told that to me. He said they always looked for a place to shield the Bradley (behind a hill, for example) and soften up the enemy with the cannon. Live and learn.