Army could have bought more armored Humvees

May 7, 2004 | Ted Evanoff

[Cannoneer No. 4]

Military understated how many can be made

The secretary of the Army said in November that the military was buying every armored Humvee that could be made.

Politicians and parents pointed out that the factories could turn out thousands more of the steel-plated trucks.

[JasonC]

That idea doesn't go back just to Nam, but to WW II. It is a very old idea. But it is not the ad hoc uparmoring of HMMWVs and 5 ton trucks I discussed above, the subject of the big current brew-ha-ha, and of this thread. It is a modification to a vehicle already designed to withstand small arms and nearby shells, trying to add RPG proofing. Those vehicles, incidentally, are mostly in the north away from the current heavy action. While the guys down south are in trucks and hummers (as well as having some tanks and Brads, to be sure - just not all that many), which they are uparmoring themselves - as well as clamoring for upgraded hummers - which even after being upgraded won't remotely stop an RPG.

[FRMAG]

Seems that the troops are very capable of coming up with ways to protect themselves when their commanders allow them to do so. The concept of a home built gun truck is not new and they were widely used in Viet Nam for convoy escort. I have read that some are being produced for use in Iraq but I'm also sure that some commanders are doing everything they can to block the use of such vehicles.

A visit to the Fort Eustis Transportation Museum web site will yeild some pics of one such gun truck named "the Eve of Destruction"

[FRMAG]

I was in transportation and logistics for most of my 26 year career and the troops seldom have what the want but almost always have what they need.

The issue if deployability is a valid one and the methods are fixed. If you go boots on the ground anyplace in the world in 72 hours air is the only way to go and it becomes a choke point because to land an aircraft withany realy lift capability yo need a developed runway thats in a secure area.

One of the major problems with Stryker is and has been cramming one into a C130 which can use semiimproved runways. No problem with loading the vehicles on larger aircraft such as a C5 which can ever swollow an M1 (provided you can talk the tread heads into shucking the huge load of crap they insist on loading on their tracks)

Non logistics types can't see this as a factor. However its said that every general has a logistician riding around on his shoulder whispering in his ear "you can't do that."

[Cannoneer No. 4]

I think you need to do some research before you presume to tell me what positions I am arguing for and against.

My involvement in this discussion started last November. Under keyword wheeledarmor you will find every thread and every post I have ever made on this subject.

Right now 4000 up armored humvees are immediately needed in Iraq is the argument on the other side of me, along with the assumptions underlying that assertion, not "Latest word from the field is that the armored hummers are not effective against the RPGs and bombs that are killing them. We need bradleys, tanks, strykers, and old apcs...The israelis sent the correct answer. Use real armor first". And "a wise commander wants some of everything: light, middle, heavy. There are different uses for each. The idea to streamline and go totally light and middle is unrealistic."

Last November M1114's were greatly coveted and OIF 1 had the same Bradleys, tanks and M113's they started with. Seems to me you have created a strawman.

[mtbopfuyn]

I am not advocating a return to Napoleonic uniforms and tactics, but the public outrage over how “unsafe” this war has become is starting to grate on my nerves.

Mine too. While I'm very, very sorry that some of our loved ones will not be coming home, war is not bloodless. Of course if the Iraqi street would rise up against those who plant bombs along the roadways and fire upon us from mosques then there wouldn't be a problem. Same goes for American muslims who've been just as silent.

[R. Scott]

The Iraqi insurgents are killing more Iraqis than Americans and Brits with their car bombs and mines (I refuse from now on to use the term “Improvised Explosive Devise” - it’s a mine!). If I were an Iraqi, I’d be pissed as hell at them - not the Americans.
Of course - not being all that religious, the Mosque’s calls to kill the foreign devils wouldn’t have a lot of affect on me.

[SAMWolf]

Snippy about it and I would appreciate any information you have on Archy. We noticed he was "missing in action" but this is the first we heard about a possible banning.

[JasonC]

Of course I can see this factor. But a year into the war, a war in which even the Stryker force went by ship, 72 hour deployability is no longer a serious factor in what part of the force to use. We need rapidly deployable forces, certainly. We do not need everything in the inventory to be deployable by air in 72 hours, because we just do not fight wars that way.

And it does not make sense to give up real capabilities that really help in the real wars we really fight, for the sake of imaginary deployment urgency that is not there, and that can be met when it is by a specialized portion of the force. We have the 82nd, we have the Marines, we have the 10th Mountain, we have the 3 divisions worth of light infantry in the Guard (some in Iraq now).

We do not need every transportation company to fit in a C-130. They don't, anyway. Yet we run combat patrols in HMMVWs, and move whole companies through IED and sniper combat zones in open trucks. A year into the war. The Marines have APCs but did not bring them. We have M113s in Kuwait but do not use them.

We are not forced to use HMMWVs for all these patrols, but we do. Then we wonder why there is a clamor from congress and the servicemen themselves to put more armor on the things. And tell them they are wrong. A force structure doctrine that does these things is not listening to lessons learned. And as a fact, the uparmored HMMWV solution, which is suboptimal from both points of view, is what we are going to get as a practical result.

[JasonC]

So do you agree with the propositions "We need bradleys, tanks, strykers, and old apcs...The israelis sent the correct answer. Use real armor first", or not?

[Cannoneer No. 4]

Does anybody know what happened to archy?

[King Prout]

Does anybody know what happened to archy?

no. DID something happen to archy?

[King Prout]

what happened?
Archy was The Man. I am rather fond of him, his style, and his depth of knowledge.

I'm emailing him NOW.

[Squantos]

Nope.... I asked the FR chief cook and bottle washers (JR & His Mods) here for some data but they seem to be too busy with some other task......

Let me know if ya find Archy ! Hopefully he's just in a brothel botherin the babes !

Stay Safe !

[snippy_about_it]

Does anybody know what happened to archy?

We noticed his absence at the Foxhole on TreadHead Tuesday, then heard the rumor of his banning but just that and nothing more. Clicked on his name and saw the message banned or suspended and have been trying to find out ever since.

PLEASE let us know when you find out. We really miss him and his expertise everywhere but especially at the Foxhole. Plus he's a great guy. I hate to think he may be gone. :-(

[FreedomPoster]

Interesting side note - you can apparently FReepmail someone whose account has been banned. I had sent him one yesterday, not realizing his account status. I just sent another "test" message, and FReepmail doesn't warn you that your "To" is a banned account.

If you guys hear from him, point him at this thread:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1131998/posts
We had talked a while back, about him maybe sneaking down to ATL for a LBGA memorial FReeper range trip, and I was pinging him about that thread with the FReepmail. Hopefully he'll still want to associate with us.

Also, in looking at some old FReepmails, I note he had had some minor run-ins with JimRob/the mods about changed headlines in some articles he had posted. I wonder if this was over something of that nature.

[King Prout]

when and if archy responds to the inquiry I e-mailed him, I will share the info he makes available for publication.

[King Prout]

I just sent him a hotlinked transcript of this thread from #70 on down, so when he gets it he'll see your alert to that thread.

[FreedomPoster]

archy, if you want to come, let King Prout know, and have him FReepmail me with your email so we can set up comms. Would love to have you come down.

Thanks, KP.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

Spc. James Holmes, 28, who was with the North Dakota National Guard in Grand Forks, where he lived, was seriously injured Monday in Iraq by an explosive device while driving an armored Humvee. He died late Friday or early Saturday at Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Germany, where he was being treated for his injuries.

Rob Keller, a spokesman for the North Dakota National Guard, said that although Holmes was a member of F Battery of the 188th Air Defense Artillery, he volunteered to go to Iraq with the 141st Engineer Combat Battalion, which didn't have enough soldiers to complete the unit.

The 141st works to ensure that all the main supply routes are safe for travel, Keller said.

"They do this by improving roadways and patrolling the roads to ensure safe conditions and by conducting anti-IED (improvised explosive device) patrols to prevent roadside bombs from being in place," he said.

Perhaps if Specialist Holmes had been driving a $62,552 Mamba

instead of a $250,000 M1114 he might be alive today. But no Democrat senators have Mamba plants in their state.

[King Prout]

anytime.