Posted on 03/06/2012 11:25:30 PM PST by U-238
One of the little-known casualties of the Iraq war was the American M-2 Bradley IFV (Infantry Fighting Vehicle). Five years ago the U.S. Army stopped using the M-2 in combat. By then it was clear that the enemy was intent on using mines and roadside bombs in a big way and the M-1 tank, Stryker, and MRAP vehicles were much better able to handle these blast weapons than the M-2. This was a hard decision to make because up until then it was believed that the M-2 could be made competitive with upgrades. For example, the BUSK (Bradley Urban Survival Kit) has been applied to about 600 M-2s. These improvements came in two batches. The first included a more powerful (at 3 million candlepower, four times brighter) spotlight. There was also a wire mesh protector to keep the optics from getting scratched and non-conductive rods that push away fallen electrical wires that often endanger crews. Later came a remote control (CLAW) 5.56mm machine-gun on the turret, additional armor underneath to provide protection from mines. There was also a bullet proof transparent shield for the commander for when his head and shoulders are out of the turret. Some non-urban warfare improvements were also made, including a series of sensors and a software package that more quickly detects when components are wearing out (so replacements could be ordered and installed) and simulation software so the gunner could train (with the fire control system, in effect turning into a realistic video game).
(Excerpt) Read more at strategypage.com ...
‘Sokay. They’ll probably be showing up at local ‘cop shops’ and Federal agencies across the country soon...to protect the dog shooters from those bitter clingers.
They would make a nice gift to Israel.
Or South Korea.
I remember my Engineering Design teacher used the Bradley as an example of what can happen when the design process gets out of control-Evidently the Bradley started out one way but when everyone got their hands into it it looked like something else. He also talked about a movie called Pentagon Wars about the design process.
The Pentagon Wars is a hoot! I don’t know how historically accurate the film is, but it is quite entertaining.
Here’s a good youtube about the tortured design process involving the Bradley from the movie:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3rJOXXNCSI0
Bradley Vehicle Parts Flawed, Suit Says
October 05, 1986
KNT News ServiceSAN JOSE, CALIF. — The manufacturer of the Bradley Fighting Vehicle used substandard or rejected parts in its assembly and conspired with the government to get rid of pesky inspectors, a previously undisclosed lawsuit shows.
The suit, which was settled out of court in 1984, was filed by a former high-ranking quality control official at FMC Corp. in San Jose, who charged that he was fired because he refused to go along with ''manufacturing improprieties'' on the Bradley.
One deposition of a former government inspector taken in connection with the suit alleges that since the firing of the quality control officer, the government's inspection program at FMC had been ''gutted.''
The suit, settled after two weeks of jury trial, shows that an internal debate swirled around testing and quality control procedures at FMC's San Jose plant as early as 1981-82, when production began on the Bradley.
Filed in 1983 by Robert Copeman, the suit claims that his firing in mid- 1982 was triggered by his ''refusal to assent to . . . certain improprieties which had occurred and were continuing to occur . . . relating to the inspection and use of mechanical parts on completed government Bradley Fighting Vehicles.''
Copeman, who was product assurance manager of FMC Corp's Ordnance Division Engineering section from March 1979 to July 1982, was responsible for control, assurance and maintenance of quality systems in the firm's engineering section. He was fired after a Defense Department audit team submitted a critical report on his department's performance.
Then in 1998:
Government contractor fraud verdict of $387 million
The government contractor who was hired to make Army tanks, called the Bradley Fighting Vehicle actually made and sold the government a substandard leaky death-trap not an amphibious war machine. So said, the findings in a fraud verdict of $387 million, Tuesday. So said, the findings in a fraud verdict of $387 million, Tuesday. The case name is U.S. ex rel. Henry Boisvert v. FMC Corp., 86-20613.The San Jose, CA federal jury ruled that Chicago-based FMC Corp., '...made 13,000 false billing claims to the government over 10 years.' The False Claims case went to trial on Jan. 20th, after 12 years of delay.
And of course, our next war will be in the urban environment. I hope the Bradleys are put in storage.
And of course, our next war will be in the urban environment. I hope the Bradleys are put in storage.
South Korea have their own IFV-the K21.
That was so funny. I’ll have to get around to seeing it.
It has always saddened me that a major factor in the design of our Army’s tactical vehicles consists of illiterate inbred religious savages and their third-party supplied explosives.
I say this as a former tanker (M48, M60).
or South Sudan
Just don't know if we can build a vehicle that can survive such...
APCs, tanks, combat aircraft, artillery, warships and IFVs are like sex. There’s no such thing as too much.
I don’t know, DC has some very well armed criminals.
Or given to the Israelis
Sounds like the old Sgt York vehicle and the M-9 engineer vehicle.
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.