Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

PAJAMAHADEEN ALERT: Facts on Humvee Armor Big Media Ignores

Posted on 12/10/2004 7:04:48 PM PST by Doctor Raoul

See the following articles:

http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/breaking_10.html

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/203200_armor10.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
5,900 were shipped from factory with armor
9,000 upgraded with kits in theater
TODAY 77% of Humvees in Iraq are armored


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

FROM THE SEATTLE TIMES ARTICLE:

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.

"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."

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.

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.

Here's the phone number 1-800-782-7892 - Intl. Export / Import Services, press "0" to get a person.

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.

Is Durbin a hypocrite for saying anything while he protects the pork at home?


TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: armor; armorflap; deceit; humvee; iraq; pj; uparmoredhumvee; wheeledarmor
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-134 next last
The COX News article is fair, it's informative.

I suspect that Rumsfeld confused the MHHWV armor problem with the problem they are having producing ceramic armor plates for flack vests.

1 posted on 12/10/2004 7:04:48 PM PST by Doctor Raoul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Doctor Raoul

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


2 posted on 12/10/2004 7:09:04 PM PST by Mr. K ((this space for rent))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Raoul

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.


3 posted on 12/10/2004 7:20:41 PM PST by WorkingClassFilth (From Ku Klux Klan to the modern era of the Koo Kleft Klan...the true RAT legacy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr. K
yeah but there is no mistaking the applause when he was asked the question

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.

4 posted on 12/10/2004 7:27:38 PM PST by Doctor Raoul ( ----- HERTZ: We're #1 ----- AVIS: We're #2 We Try Harder ----- CBS: We're #3 We LIE Harder)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Raoul
A question and answer session has been hijacked by a newsman. Instead of reporting, this guy fabricates news.
Would have liked to hear Rumsfeld ask where these dumps are for garnering parts and what support for personal protection is needed while scavenging.
The rest sounds like Rather: while it's not true, it's nevertheless accurate.


.
5 posted on 12/10/2004 7:27:57 PM PST by hermgem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WorkingClassFilth
Like Rummy said, you go to war with the army you have - not the army you want. Never been any different.

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.

6 posted on 12/10/2004 7:40:40 PM PST by Doctor Raoul ( ----- HERTZ: We're #1 ----- AVIS: We're #2 We Try Harder ----- CBS: We're #3 We LIE Harder)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: hermgem
The rest sounds like Rather: while it's not true, it's nevertheless accurate.

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...

7 posted on 12/10/2004 7:44:00 PM PST by Doctor Raoul ( ----- HERTZ: We're #1 ----- AVIS: We're #2 We Try Harder ----- CBS: We're #3 We LIE Harder)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Mr. K; All

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.


8 posted on 12/10/2004 7:57:57 PM PST by x1stcav
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Raoul

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.'


9 posted on 12/10/2004 8:09:51 PM PST by WorkingClassFilth (From Ku Klux Klan to the modern era of the Koo Kleft Klan...the true RAT legacy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: WorkingClassFilth

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."


10 posted on 12/10/2004 8:22:58 PM PST by sully777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Raoul

"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.


11 posted on 12/10/2004 8:23:30 PM PST by dsc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sully777

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.


12 posted on 12/10/2004 8:54:36 PM PST by sully777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: WorkingClassFilth

---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!


13 posted on 12/10/2004 9:47:48 PM PST by claudiustg (Go Sharon! Go Bush!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: devolve; potlatch; PhilDragoo

Ping


14 posted on 12/10/2004 9:48:17 PM PST by ntnychik (Proud member of the Bush-wazee)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Raoul
This armoring issue is completely out of whack from the word go.

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).

15 posted on 12/10/2004 10:15:20 PM PST by mattdono ("Crush the democrats, drive them before you, and hear the lamentations of the scumbags" -Big Arnie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ntnychik; MeekOneGOP; potlatch; Happy2BMe; PhilDragoo; Smartass; Travis McGee


Good thread

Armor on my (souped up!) Jeep:



0


16 posted on 12/10/2004 10:23:42 PM PST by devolve (http://00access.tripod.com/GreenGrass.html http://00access.tripod.com/CountryRoads.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: WorkingClassFilth

http://3ad.com/history/wwll/article.pages/death.traps.htm

Excellent book about US tanks in WW II.


17 posted on 12/11/2004 3:18:51 AM PST by Born Conservative (Entertainment is a thing of the past, today we've got television - Archie Bunker)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: hermgem
The rest sounds like Rather: while it's not true, it's nevertheless accurate.

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.

18 posted on 12/11/2004 4:45:31 AM PST by The_Victor (Calvin: "Do tigers wear pajamas?", Hobbes: "Truth is we never take them off.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Raoul

My favorite new word-
Pajamahadeen

Funny, yet accurate.


19 posted on 12/11/2004 4:54:47 AM PST by Muzzle_em
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Raoul

When did armored vehicles become an entitlement program?

20 posted on 12/11/2004 5:03:13 AM PST by Cannoneer No. 4 (Kandahar Airfield -- “We’re not on the edge of the world, but we can see it from here")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-134 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson