Posted on 07/16/2008 4:37:56 PM PDT by SandRat
WASHINGTON, July 16, 2008 – Commanders in Afghanistan have asked for more of the mine-resistant, ambush-protected vehicles the military calls “MRAPs,” the Pentagon’s press secretary said today.
There are roughly 800 MRAPs in Afghanistan. “It’s safe to say that commanders are interested” in more of the vehicles, Geoff Morrell told reporters.
Though the request is unofficial so far, it was relayed by Army Maj. Gen. Jeffrey J. Schloesser, commander of Combined Task Force 101 at Bagram Airfield to Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Navy Adm. Mike Mullen during the chairman’s recent visit to Afghanistan.
Part of the request may be tied to the normal planning that always goes on, another senior Pentagon spokesman said. If the number of U.S. troops goes up in Afghanistan – which President Bush and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates would like to see happen – then the number of MRAPs in the country will have to grow also, Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman explained.
“Certainly, that type of planning takes place at various levels all the time,” Whitman said. “Force protection is key to any force-planning construct.”
Morrell said there 800 MRAPs are in the country already, and officials would like about 200 more.
U.S. commanders in Afghanistan want the RG-31, the smaller of two versions of the MRAP, because it’s better suited for the unimproved roads and rugged terrain of the country. “The RG-31 is the MRAP of choice in Afghanistan,” Morrell said.
The fact that the task force commander spoke to Mullen is not strange in the least, Morrell said.
“The chairman has made it very clear that [commanders] should not be bashful about speaking up if they need more forces than they currently have,” Morrell said. “[Commanders] should not worry about the overall stress on the force and be mindful of what their needs are in their areas of responsiblity. DoD leaders will determine if it is possible to meet their needs.
“‘Speak up if you need them, and we’ll see what we can do’ is the way it works,” Morrell said.
It can survive an anti tank mine under a wheel, 50 caliber gunfire doesn't faze it, and an RPG won't kill the crew, usually.
OTOH, it's gunner is in a protected turret firing an awesome dual "40/50", that is, an M2 heavy machine gun, and an M19 40mm grenade machine gun.
http://www.defense-update.com/products/m/m-1117-ASV.htm
I vote No !...........don’t like it !
To much glass, to many sizes, looks to be a high CG with a narrow wheel base. Top heavy ? yes No ?? Dunno all the specifics yet I would like something lower profile with a CROW system versus a troop exposed. Common sized windows for fast easy replacement. Maybe each window has option for a portal gun operated by passengers. A HK416 with a CMAG for example. Seating in rear for 4 fighters seated back too back facing out towards the threat, a CROW gunner in front passenger seat and driver.
Existence loads hung on the exterior w/ other bulk gear and LBE worn. Basket racks for said gear does double duty as RPG screen. Top is clean and bottom is V shaped blast resistant as the MRAP series are. Soft spall blanket liners inside over a layer of line-x’s spray on spall .
Duality / redundancy / overkill on the HVAC systems for restful comfort in weather extremes for all passengers. Flooring designed too allow for a washout low point drain if vehicle is hit hard and passengers are injured or vehicle is really dirty due conditions. All external and interior electrics and communication gear is waterproof.
Trailer pintle for a trailer as well as a fuel connection that will allow the use of a towed fuel / gear trailer that allows the vehicle to exceed normal range by a factor of 3X on extended road trips such as was seen from Kuwait too Baghdad and when it arrives at the FEBA it can disconnect at a staging area and be full up with fuel and ready.
Sort of a long bed enclosed H1 with cougar design elements per se.......
just a SWAG on my part .......nothing more !
I do like that turrent on the M117.....looks like my old V100 Commando from SEA !
It might be a descendent. There was a Cadillac Gage “commando car” or some such that the M1117 ASV traces its lineage to.
I’m working ASVs into the plot of my new book, so I’m reading all I can about them. One major factor seems to be that TROOP LOVE THEM. Can’t get enough of them. Check this funny video.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=c86_1198955250
I put a lot of faith in actual troop feedback, and the feedback on the M1117 ASV seems to be very positive.
It's 15 tons, 20'L, 8.5'H, 8.5'W, 63MPH.
http://baesystemspresskit.com/ausa/_RG33_Series_Mine_Protected_Vehicles.cfm
BUT — I felt "safer" (less like prey and more like predator) as a Grunt on foot, under the canopy, in small groups, a moonless night, in the rain, heavily armed, with ammo carriers, no virgins, no ambitious ticket punching officers along, at least one local who knew ALL the trails and could get us home on a different trail than we went out on, with a team made up of survival inclined short timers who had fought together before this "walk”.....
But then, that is in far different circumstances than our warriors face today..
In Afghanistan, we've become the Police Force in a situation where the enemy is usually unidentifiable and unlikely to show himself in a stand up firefight — while our guys are moving about in plain sight with targets painted on their vehicles and backs....
So I guess a hardened ride is a good move...
Too funny !
That sure does look like my old V100..........shy of the turrent on the ASV.
I’m with you, I always felt like a target was painted on anything like that. But as you said, in the open desert or in cities with no identifiable enemy....it works.
And most importantly, trust the troops who use them. The M1117 ASVs are in high demand by the actual troops, not the wonks or lobbyists or REMFs.
That is indeed a point that has made me wonder what the SOP change was shy of distance and speed and terrain. I would have much rather been afoot as well that canned up in light armor with every third grader carrying a PG7.
Each war drives different concepts and tactics.........a smart soldier keeps em all in mind !
Stay safe !!
I think the M1117 ASV would make an awesome bugout vehicle for when TSHTF. Top speed 63MPH, 450 mile range at 45MPH, fords a 5’ deep stream, climbs a 60* grade, or over a 2’ obstacle.
And at a mere $700K, they are a bargain....compared to Stykers and Bradleys anyway.
I’m thinking a stolen cessna 172 w/ a parachute and ruck would get me further from society if I got knees in the trees low till time too bail out and let the AC crash a hundred miles away on autopilot .....
I get excess cash indeed a few level seven defender class mercedes will be on the shopping list !
If I get too ride to my death I wanna go in style .......:o)
bling bling bang !
That sucker just looks like an “up-armored” Land Rover to me.
I’ve been drooling over the Sherpa....a great little bushplane that the ruskies make from a whole lot of titanium ! Stall speed close too walking speed per se !
Heck in Texas one can get enough headwind at times too land like a helicopter even in the area clubs 172’s I use.
There are some men in this forum who could put together a pretty strong case showing that the "wonks, lobbyists and some REMFs" teamed up with AMERICAN politicians and Leftists have killed or caused the death of more American warriors than one would believe.
It's a sad reality, and I still work myself into a fury just thinking about it...
It led to many years of drinking - before I could put the bottle down for good.
It can sometimes survive a single anti tank mine under a wheel,[SovBloc TM46 0r TM57 are most common, triple-stacking two ot three of them, sometimes atop a couple of 152/155 howitzer HE projectiles is another thing entirely] but obviously, anything that can kill a tank can take out an ASV. The good news is that this uses up the bad guys' supply of effective AT weapons; the bad news is it's hard on ASV crews...who are still better off than if they'd been in a Stryker or armored Humvee...
It is CLAIMED that 50 caliber gunfire doesn't faze it,[but 12.7 Dshk or NSVT rounds might and 14.5mm KPV rounds will probably chew up an ASV badly] and an RPG won't kill the crew, usually...if it's an older RPG-7 or RPG-16 with the older PG7 grenade. Against the current PG-7VR tandem warhead or even the RPG-22 with VP-18 impact fuze the armor of the ASV will likely not fare so well.
The point is: in a low-intensity war where the other side is on foot or in pickup truck-based *technicals, the ASV will do okay for roadblocks and convoy escorts. But it doesn't have the interior space to carry additional troops for urban ops, and in any sort of fight against an enemy with a combined forces capability that's got mech infantry vehicles or even upgraded obsolete light armor, the ASV would be cold meat.
It's not a bad vehicle,. used within its limitations. But go outside that critical envelope, and there'll be vehicle and crew losses...and THEN that troop confidence suffers, and so does overall morale, as a consequence.
OTOH, it's gunner is in a protected turret firing an awesome dual "40/50", that is, an M2 heavy machine gun, and an M19 40mm grenade machine gun.
Don't forget two other critical points about the ASV: that 40mm is NOT an antiarmor gun- there are some things that could be done about that- and that after a .50 M2 has hadn more than 150 rounds fired through it in a 2-minute period, the barrel is hot enough to produce a cookoff, and a barrel change is required. No problem for a vehicle-borne crew that doesn't have to decide between carrying a spare barrel or two more boxes of ammo...but they DO have top go outside the turret armor to make the change and headspace the changeout. We had the same problem with the M2 heavy barrel turret-type in our M48 and M60 tank cupolas circa 1965-1970...and you will note that currentr US tanks do not utilize commanders' cupes for their .50 MG mounts.
Ever flown in a PZL-104 Wilga? You have GOT to try it.
Needs one or two little changes to be practical in all theaters. Both of which are probable do-able.
Top speed 63MPH, 450 mile range at 45MPH, fords a 5’ deep stream,fully amphibious climbs a 60* grade, or over a 2’ obstacle. Winch/roller front and rear.
Rhodesian Buffalo armoured car/personnel carrier, circa 1978/79:
I'd like to know how well the remote turrets they've been mounting on these pigs really work. But I suspect much better than M114/CROWs. And these would be better still.
CROWS on Humvees:
I’m not ready for that step, not while I have 11 brain cells that still fire half the time.
There you go again, always dragging the “real world” into my fantasies.
Damn, it looks like that Wilga just JUMPS off of the ground!
I have one Archy !
looks like this one....I keep it on the top shelf !
http://www.aircraftresourcecenter.com/Gal3/2201-2300/Gal2205_Pzl-104_Karakas/04.jpg
Buddy of mine has a Lancair and you fly that one ON THE GROUND it’s so fast......I’m use too a 50-65 kias landing speed with little Cessna 172’s and 180’s.....yet that Lancair is a Corvette if this Wilga is a VW Bug !
I’d like to fly in that Wilga ....has a supercub sort of look too it and I would suspect it’s performance is equal too or better. As well the Sherpas have a very very low stall speed and looked really good for use as a bush plane.
I like em ! Wished I could afford one !..........of each !
Well, they’re both wheeled “armored” vehicles — but I think I’d mount the RG33.
Open bed vehicles have a nasty tendency to attract and catch hand or tube launched high trajectory ordnance!
On a side note - due to the picture of the vehicle you attached -— I’ll bet the “Zimbabweans” are regretting the transition from Rhodesia to Zimbabwe....
sounds like a book I read once.
Some of those STOL planes will probably “fly backwards” in enough wind. I used to watch goonie birds try to land on my spreaders in the ocean. They would literally “fly backwards” looking over their shoulder to make a zero speed landing. If the true wind was maybe 15 or 20, they were making less than that forward speed, “flying backwards” toward the mast with total control.
One of my favorite things too do , albeit at 4000 feet AGL versus the height of yer mast so I have safe altitude to recover if I stall, is too turn into a strong headwind, bring the aircraft speed as slow as possible, just making the stall horn chirp and fixing my left landing wheel on a point on the ground in line with my eye and “hover” over that point. GPS will show zero ground speed. Very Cool thing too do .......
GPS makes everything so easy! A child can navigate today.
And that’s a good thing, overall.
Oh it’s awesome stuff ......and I use it for flying, fishing , four wheeling / hunting and general driving. I own a Garmin 76S, a Garmin 60CXs and a Tom Tom 720 and each has it’s good points and BAD as well...... Even my Black Berry Curve has GPS...LOL !
But when depending on the best I go with the Garmin 60CXs and back that up with a Ranger T Silva Compass as well as a Brunton Pro transit compass and a library of topo maps and sat pics I download of the area I go into.
***if anyone buys just ONE GPS ......Garmin 60CXs ! Good for hiking, driving, flying and boating. Very cool product !
In ocean sailing, flying, and (I’d assume, not having really been in it), fatigue is a huge killer. Fatigue leads to inattention, mistakes, etc.
That’s where GPS really shines, because you can navigate almost perfectly even when fatigued. How many sailors put their boat on a reef on the 3rd stormy day with no stars, sun or sleep for 72 hours?
Of course, when dealing with fire missions, mistakes can still be made, as when pilots have punched in the friendly lat/lon, instead of the enemy lat/lon....it has happened.
I meant to add combat after sailing and flying but sidetracked myself.
Agree...all things man made are fallible.
The GPS is darn near infallible.
But that human punching in the go-to lat/lon numbers can be a big problem, when he’s punching them into a JDAM.
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.
