When did armored vehicles become an entitlement program?
Posted on 12/10/2004 7:04:48 PM PST by Doctor Raoul
See the following articles: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/203200_armor10.html FROM THE SEATTLE TIMES ARTICLE: Here's the phone number 1-800-782-7892 - Intl. Export / Import Services, press "0" to get a person. Is Durbin a hypocrite for saying anything while he protects the pork at home?
http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/breaking_10.html
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m998.htm
From those articles and webpages, here's some facts:
19,400 Humvees in Iraq
TODAY 77% of Humvees in Iraq are armored
5,900 were shipped from factory with armor
9,000 upgraded with kits in theater
Unarmored Humvees aren't supposeed to go off base.
Unarmored Humvees travel between bases on a flatbed truck.
Of 9,386 armor kits shipped to Iraq, 9,143 have been installed.
That's 97% installed, only 3% to go.
There are at least 16 varients of the Humvee:
M998 cargo/troop carrier without winch
M1038 cargo/troop carrier with winch
M966 TOW missile carrier, basic armor, without winch
M1036 TOW missile carrier, basic armor, with winch
M1045 TOW missile carrier, supplemental armor, without winch
M1046 TOW missile carrier, supplemental armor, with winch
M1025 armament carrier, basic armor, without winch
M1026 armament carrier, basic armor, with winch
M1043 armament carrier, supplemental armor, without winch
M1044 armament carrier, supplemental armor, with winch
M996 mini-ambulance, 2-litter, basic armor
M997 maxi-ambulance, 4-litter, basic armor
M1035 soft-top ambulance, 2-litter
M1037 S-250 shelter carrier, without winch
M1042 S-250 shelter carrier, with winch
M1069 tractor for M119 105-mm light gun
The Humvees to be factory-armored by O'Gara-Hess have some different specifications than the models shipped without armor, Woodward said. So increasing production requires careful planning.
Today on Rush's show, he had a caller that swears she knows people that are buying steel locally there in the Pacific Northwest and sending it by UPS to soldiers in Iraq.
"It's not like making a Big Mac," he said. "There are so many configurations. ... You can't just whip them through like a big grill in a McDonald's."
I called UPS. They will ship to Iraq, but you have to pick up your shippment at their offices in Baghdad or Basra. They don't deliver to anyone's door.
Also, length, width and height can't total more than 165 inches.
The weight limit on packages to Iraq, 150 lbs.
Yeah, ship armor plate by UPS, that'll work.
A caller to Dom Giordano's show last night had three very good observations. The handwringing liberals posture this as "if you only cared enough, people wouldn't die" even in a war.
He also said it depended on believing that people in the Pentagon would put $$$ before a soldier's life.
Last, he noted that the HMMWV replced the jeep and that no one would expect even an armored jeep to do what we have armored HMMWVs doing.
Rock Island Arsenal has a piece of this according to the caller and LTC Scott Rutter USA(Ret) and that Durbin's backyard. Obviously those take more time to reach the soldiers than those modified in theater.
yeah but there is no mistaking the applause when he was asked the question
I think the administration should view it as useful feedback and say they will be talking to the troops directly like this from now on
Let's not forget the tragedy of the Grant tanks in North Africa and the hazards of their riveted armor. Then, even though the Sherman tanks were 2nd rate compared to the latest German armor, the military modified them to assault the hedgerows and minefields of France.
An old-timer aquaintance of mine recounts tales of welding Sherman armor in a circle of GI's holding ponchos so the Germans couldn't see the salvage operation going on.
Like Rummy said, you go to war with the army you have - not the army you want. Never been any different.
Question in my mind is did the troops know the true status or was the applause for a misunderstanding? What was their schedule for conversion, would they really go in unmod'ed HMMWvs?
I think the administration should view it as useful feedback and say they will be talking to the troops directly like this from now on
Remember, that was the reporter's version of the question. Other soldier's allegedly asked questions about the same subject but that wasn't covered. I'm trying to locate a transcript of the entire event to confirm or deny that assertion in one of the articles Drudge linked.
Remember, nobody saw this coming. To get around the time required, they'd have had to seen it LONG BEFORE even Bush's election. In a Slate article, they quote Ted Kennedy mocking the Army budget lines for armor upgrades on Fiscal Years 04 and 05. They were zero. But the Fat Drunk knows full well that when he's reading that in '04, it's a VERY cheap shot. Those numbers are locked in concrete TWO years prior. That's not to say the Army didn't go in for a SUPPLIMENT APPRORIATION.
The media and the left put a LOT of BS out there, just like they did the body armor.
The media likes to make that reply into a snipe at the soldier. I don't see it that way. For years, we always heard the saying that "The next war will be Come As You Are".
Nobody foresaw such a war, translated that to operational requirements, doctrine and equipment.
What's good for this war would be a disaster in another.
Wasn't the RatherGate Report due out today?
I can't wait for the scene, Dan getting into the CBS helicopter, suddenly turns around, raises both arms and makes the "V" signs with both hands...
I think some of these troops have to quit whining.
One never has everything one wants, or needs, in theatre.
This touchy, feely, crap started back during the Clinton years when senior command was supposed to get in touch with the troop's real feelings. What a crock.
They have it a lot better than in my day, the same as I had it a lot better than in my father's, etc.
The lesson is: everybody needs to remember there is such a thing as chain of command. It is almost never, ever to be broken. even when invited to do so.
Check the history of the Sherman Tank in WWII for a good, really good, contrast to this rubbish. What Rummy said is true - 'you go to war with the army you have, not the one you want.'
During WWII the early versions of the tank was lightly armored for speed. Its gun was small and the shell was unable to dent the Tiger. The german rounds would pierce the Sherman's skin and light up the insides, killing or wounding all occupants inside.
After the Allies reclaimed a tank after battle, men were "volunteered" to clean out the various body parts/stuff left. The Army would then refurbish and reuse the tank in combat. The new occupants noted a distinct odor in the tank. "It smelled like death."
"He also said it depended on believing that people in the Pentagon would put $$$ before a soldier's life."
Unfortunately, there are some who do not put the troops first.
THE UNITED STATES ARMY IN WORLD WAR II http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com/wwii/usarmy/tanktypes.aspx
by Rich Anderson
Tank Types Available
Medium tank types utilized included the M3 Grant, M4 Sherman 75mm, M4 Sherman 76mm, and the M26 Pershing. All tank battalions that landed in Normandy were equipped with the M4 Sherman 75. However, by late June and early July of 1944, a number of M4 Sherman 76mm tanks were available and began to replace the 75mm armed tanks. Replaced M4 Sherman 75 tanks were then refitted by Ordnance workshops (when possible) with the 76mm. By late 1944 there was usually one M4 Sherman 76mm per platoon. However, the 8th, 9th, 10th, and 11th Armored divisions which arrived in late 1944 were entirely equipped with the M4 Sherman 76mm. This was also true of the divisions which arrived in 1945 (the 12th, 13th, 14th, 16th, and 20th). Of course, combat losses in these divisions were replaced by whatever was available -- which often meant M4 Sherman 75 mm tanks.
An important variant of the M4 was the M4A3E2 Jumbo assault tank. This modified vehicle was heavily armored (although all initial production models were equipped with the 75mm). Few (254) were factory built, however Ordnance workshops of the US First and Third Armies successfully modified many M4s in the field to Jumbos (between January and March 1945 the Third Army alone produced 108 of these "ersatz Jumbos," it appears that about 100 additional were produced in 1944). Allocation of the Jumbo varied. Usually they were found in the armored divisions, although some First Army separate tank battalions also had them. Normally there was no more than one "Jumbo" per company, although some divisions organized them as a complete company within the battalion.
The first M26 Pershing tanks were delivered in January 1945, the 3rd and 9th Armored divisions each being issued ten. In the 9th Armored Division these were used to form a temporary 4th Platoon in two tank companies. Those of the 9th Armored Division participated in the seizure of the Remagen Bridge. The M24 Chaffee light tank appeared in the ETO in December 1944, initially going to the 759th Light Tank Battalion, and then, as available, to the light tank companies of the armored divisions and cavalry mechanized squadrons.
---Like Rummy said, you go to war with the army you have - not the army you want. Never been any different.---
Amen to that!
One very good thing about the Sherman's was that they kept running a lot longer than the German stuff. Another good thing was we had a lot of them!
Ping
No (repeat: NO!) combat troop went into battle with a flak jacket or the other "armored" aspects to their personal gear. There were non-combat troops that didn't have flak jackets initially, and those are the ones that sKerry was trying to paint as all troops. Total horse crap.
Everyone has already broken down the myriad reasons about the HUMVEEs. The most poignant is still the most simple: HUMVEEs are NOT APCs (Armored Personnel Carriers). The HUMVEE was NOT actually designed to be armored. As noted, it was simply to replace the Jeep. Now, with the battlefield usefulness of the HUMVEE, it has transformed, ON THE BATTLEFIELD, into a Jeep/APC. Once this was recognized, the engineering was retrofitted to accomodate armoring and production was ramped up 2,250% (reports are production went from 20 to 450) in fairly short order.
So, we are in war. A vehicle that is not an APC starts to be used --more and more-- as an APC. Our military, which is notoriously slow, contracts to ramp up production. They do so, to the order of over 2000% of what was being produced.
And this is a failure on the part of administration, the Pentagon, Don Rumsfeld and all the private businesses that are support the War Fighter?
What?
This is friggin' the 7th level of bizarro world that they libs have entered. These people have lost all sense (as if they ever had any).
Good thread
Armor on my (souped up!) Jeep:
0
http://3ad.com/history/wwll/article.pages/death.traps.htm
Excellent book about US tanks in WW II.
It gets traction with the media because it fits the template. I'd be willing to bet that none of the soldiers at the conference had ever dug through a dump for armor, nor did they directly know anyone who has. I'll bet they've heard stories, but cannot put a face and name of someone they know into the story. If 77% of the Humvees are already armored, that leaves a very small % of soldiers who ever come into contact with a vehicle that isn't.
My favorite new word-
Pajamahadeen
Funny, yet accurate.
When did armored vehicles become an entitlement program?
Has anybody seen any reports about how this armor will affect the transmission, the suspension and the motor?
My guess is the Humvee has had a drastic reduction in its life as the armor will tear up the Humvee real fast.
What about the new armored Humvees? Are they just throwing the armor on or does this version get upgrades to the motor, transmission, etc. to accommodate the armor?
The shame is that we waste so many billions on African AIDS dollars and domestic waste that we do not have an appropriate urban warfare armored vehicle in the Humvee Class for our troops.
ALL foreign aid and ALL domestic welfare should be stopped until we have sufficiently supplied our troops with appropriate war fighting tools.
I hardly know where to start or stop on this subject. One part of me feels for the soldiers, and the other side wants to say, enough is enough of the belly aching. I hate to tell war stories, Oliver North does a fine job of that every Sunday night, but having "been there and done that" and have a Tee Shirt somewhere, I want to toss in my two cents worth from 34 years ago in South Vietnam.
I was in field artillery as a mechanic. I spent the majority of my one year in firing batteries spread throughout the third military region, especially the area from Cambodia to Tay Ninh and a little North to Song Bee, Anh Loc and South toward Saigon. We fired hundreds of 155mm rounds daily and had to have some method of getting resupplied. That task was the battery headquarters, Service Battery was tasked with running the ASP (Ammo Supply Point) but we had to get the ammo and other supplies from the base camps to the fire bases. How did we do it? Convoys of 5t drop side cargo trucks. Support for the convoy was usually a couple of gun jeeps (Cannoneer No. 4 - that pic sure looks familiar) and one or two "quads" mounted in 5 tons. That was it.
Armor protection for the drivers consisted of sand bags on the floor and a scrounged flak vest draped over the door to protect us from snipers. Was I comfortable? Heck no, but we had a mission, we had the equipment and we did the job with no complaints, other than when the beer we were supposed to get was not there or some other hiccup.
There was an incident I was involved in 2 days before Christmas where an ambush killed two soldiers, probably needlessly, but there was no outcry for more armor. They were in an M38B1 (3/4 ton truck) and the ambush was done with .51 caliber machine guns. Would they have survived in more heavily armored trucks? Maybe. However we didn't have them. We broke up the ambush and killed the bad guys. We mourned the loss of two fellow soldiers, and like most of the military today, we continued with the mission.
I wonder why we are starting to see a military in which each soldier is starting to develop a mindset they are "owed" a personal set of armor. It would be great to do so, but each battle in each war is different and would require slightly different equipment, tactics, techniques and procedures. If we were to conduct war in that manner we might still be waiting in the English Channel off of Normandy.
This is sort of rambling, but I have not had enough coffee today.
The Germans called the M4 Sherman the Ronson "because it always lights the first time" Ronson was the brand name of the number one cigarette lighter at the time.
I read somewhere that the new ones have upgraded running gear also. The humvees that are being modified in the field are so slow some soldiers are complaining that they are a danger in themselves because of the reduced speed. In WWII we had tank destroyers that were built on the M4 chassis with a 76 MM gun that had almost no armor and not even a turret, their protection was speed. However, in this case the main danger are car bombs and other such devices and the armor is a good thing to have but overblown by the news trying to GET Bush and the boys. I am sure the break down rate of the old humvees with the kit installed is a lot higher.
I'd be willing to bet that none of the soldiers at the conference had ever dug through a dump for armor, nor did they directly know anyone who has. I'll bet they've heard stories, but cannot put a face and name of someone they know into the story.
Good point... puts me in mind of the Vietnam Vets Against the War (VVAW) tactics used to smear our troops in Vietnam. From what I understand almost all Viet Vets that talked about atrocities never actually observed any, they just heard of them through the grapevine (or made them up). Anything repeated often enough and widely enough becomes 'truth' in the public eye. Remember there are financially and educationally supported 'arms' of the old VVAW alive and active in our country and in our military -- Iraq Vets Against the War and Vet Against the Iraq War. Any of you who have contacts in our military needs to be educating them to be on the lookout for these types of rumors and mentalities and protect themselves and their buddies against believing in and repeating the rumours. Do some research on the VVAW, IVAW and VVAW . . .
bump
BINGO. Aside from the fact that the liberal media has a fresh point of impact to pile on the Bush administration with, what bothers me most about this issue is the sense that every military vehicle in theater must somehow be able to withstand the effects of an IED or an RPG hit. It's a fantasy notion, since IEDs can and have easily bounced M2A3s around and RPGs will penetrate any flat panel armor suitable to be attached to a HMMV or cargo vehicle. This feeds into a fortress mentality (can you say basecamp?) where the name of the game is to "survive" the war vice win it.
The media loves this, of course, because it feeds into their Vietnam prototype for reporting failure and quagmire. When your hunkered down in your HMMV/5 ton/HMMT etc...your not (effectively) fighting a threat that's more mobile than you. When your not fighting, you're not contributing and you become a target marker. Do I want our soldiers and Marines protected? Sure, to the extent that they can still function in attacking and killing terrorists, but not at the expense of losing the initiative.
John Kerry would have provided the very best armor plated spit balls!
My main complain and main reason for this article is the media's portrayal of this as a deriliction of duty. As if the majority of troops don't have the armor and the military isn't busting it hump to solve the problem.
That's NOT rambling, it's a much better conclusion than you'll see in the New York Times or the Washington Post. And if that's the result of too much coffee, we need to send the liberal media more coffee with the pajamas so maybe they'll get it right.
Yep, I think it's called "spaul" (sp?). Some cases. a piece on the inside breaks off, even though the round doesn't penetrate.
Been spewin my 2 cents already on the issue.......:o)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1298645/posts?page=9#9
Humvee is a jeep replacement.......how many jeeps have been armored up over the past wars ? Zip, nada , none ! Our gun jeeps (M151's) had a pedistal mounted M60 and a passenger mounted M60. Now one can say oh yeah well we road into battle on horseback back when but that doesn't make the issue of not enough hardened humvess any better....I agree....but !
We're trying to replace tactics with a false sense of security IMO. Polidiots need to let our folks engage and eliminate the threat vs existing in a hardened facility or vehicle among the threat.
A hardened humvee will not stop an IED or even the old PG-2 series of RPG's much less the PG7 series and it's improvements over the years. We're attempting to run a gauntlet on a daily basis . Destroy the gauntlet. If troops are attacked every day on a standard resupply route then counter ambush ops need to be increased along with snipers moved into the areas to eliminate those planting IED's or civilians moving with any weapon other than a handgun for personal protection.
I am and will always be of the opinion that any modern military conflict should be over in less that 96 hours. We need to kick ass, break all the infastructure or power, water, communications and sewage. Blow the bridges, airfields and ports then leave. Walk away at that point. Let other communist/terrorist /socialist regimes clean up their own mess.
If they attack America or Americans again we'll be back and will whack em again and again and not play nation building for years at great cost to americans over a decade or so.
America payed a dear price on 9-11 and doesn't need to keep paying. Make our enemies pay......until we get medevil on them and theirs we subject ourselves to such long term misery and loss of our loved ones. Thats my rant on the matter, right or wrong it's just my opinion.
Stay safe !
Stormin Norman had the right idea. Overwhelming force! On our convoys we used recon-by-fire for any suspected strong points. The bad guys knew what waited them and when they forgot, they soon found out, especially when a few well placed 155mm HE or Willy Pete rounds served for the recon-by-fire weapon of choice. We knew where the likely ambush points were and had the fire direction center work up data. As we approached the convoy commander would call in and they let it rip. Sure took the wind out of them. However, in the kinder and more gentle Army of today that would not be looked on kindly.
We have the ability.
Why we're doing the old fashioned two-step, I'd like to know?
Um, there are Brads serving in Iraq today that have successfully withstood 17 RPG hits and scores of 155mm IED detonations. Armor works, plain and simple. The soldiers know it, that is why they want it. The rear echelon new lighter deployable force types at the pentagon thought that the need for armor - which they understand too - could be restricted to front line troops. It can't, there aren't lines, particularly with IEDs, which are the largest threat numerically speaking. There is no loss of initiative in being in a Brad or armed 113, able to hose any ambush. And service and supply troops do not exactly become more venturesome and active because they are armored only by their BDUs.
I've seen plenty of M2A3's laying on their sides or plumped up like a Ball Park Frank after taking the blast from an IED. Armor protection works to a point, and, of course, it has function and purpose, but it is not a panacea for avoiding risk. It mitigates some risk and creates others. See post 33. Squantos sums it up pretty well.
I can't think of an issue that's more important than knowing that our troops have everything we can reasonably provide for them in theater. With all the conflicting reports about this, I'm not yet sure where the truth lies. There's a lot of good info on this thread.
Just wait, in a few years we'll be in a conflict where swift vehicles are what's needed.
Then we'll have hand wringing about the slow heavy humvees and how slowly the Rice admistration has been in removing the obsolete armor.
What ABC, AP, CBS, CNN, FOX, MSNBC, NBC, NY Times DON'T want YOU to know.
The Truth!
The rapid redeploy go light crowd have gone round the bend on this one. We aren't 96 hours into an emergency war where the number one priority is whether something fits in a C-130. We've had years to ship whatever we want on a slow boat clear around the world, we've spent tens of billions, we have thousands of contractors in country, we've know IEDs were the enemy's preferred means for almost a year and a half.
Wars sometimes are matters of attrition that last years, and we should win them anyway. Those wishing it were not so are wishing, not facing military realities. I'm all for rapidly breaking the enemy's main fielded forces, but only in maneuverist cartoons do wars end with a cheering section and a parade because somebody drove behind the enemy. In the real world, you have to hold the ground and kill anyone who still wants some, as long as it takes. Learn a lesson from reality every once and a while.
you da man! doc
Truth bump!!
BTT!!!!!!
WHAT?!?!?!?!
UPS doesn't do home deliveries in Iraq ?!?!?!?
I Demand a Federal Investigation as to why!!
/ s >
Tell all liberals: We could just drop one biiiig bomb and solve the whole problem.
Feel free to add your own
BTT!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.