Speakeasy forum

General discussion

Up-armored vehicle effort.............

by Mac McMullen / October 29, 2004 1:37 PM PDT

Put aside anyone's opinion with respect to the equipment
the troops started with in Iraq, and the length of time it
has taken the bureaucracy of government procurement systems
to react, here is a current report of the up-grading of vehicles:

WASHINGTON, Oct. 29, 2004 ? The assembly lines are moving 24/7 to keep up with the demand for up-armored vehicles in Iraq and for conversion kits to add extra protection to vehicles already there.

Gary Motsek, director of support operations for the U.S. Army Materiel Command, said the effort to provide increased vehicle protection against grenades, improvised explosive devices and small-arms fire is progressing fast and furiously as demand continues to increase.

Nearly 5,100 up-armored Humvees have been delivered to Army and Marine Corps units in Iraq, with another 724 on ships bound for the theater, Motsek said.

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Oct2004/n10292004_2004102903.html

Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: Up-armored vehicle effort.............
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: Up-armored vehicle effort.............
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
Re: Up-armored vehicle effort.............
by SteveGargini / October 31, 2004 5:44 AM PST
"For us, the bottom line is getting this equipment to the theater as quickly as possible," Motsek summarized. "When you're putting people in harm's way, you want to ensure that they have everything they need to protect them as they carry out their missions."

Absolutely, I agree with him.
Collapse -
Re: Up-armored vehicle effort.............
by Dan McC / November 1, 2004 1:52 AM PST

They should have listened to this guy before they started this war.

Dan

Collapse -
Thanks Mac, a very important and worthwhile post
by Ziks511 / October 31, 2004 5:59 AM PST

And I'm glad the materiel side of things is improving. I am also hoping the command side improves in order to protect our troops.

Your erstwhile, but not knee-jerk, opponent

Rob Boyter

Collapse -
Re: Up-armored vehicle effort.............
by Dan McC / November 1, 2004 1:51 AM PST

It would have been nice to shut this barn door a bit earlier, but better late than never.

Dan

Collapse -
Re: Up-armored vehicle effort.............
by holtnr / November 1, 2004 8:25 AM PST

It is my understanding (from NPR this AM) that most armor upgrades don't include under body armor, and that a remote controlled land mine is therefore just as deadly as it would be against an un-armored vehicle. Sad

In the same time frame, to be fair, they also pointed out that the recent Defense Appropriations bill had been larded up with non-defense related pork barrel line items for many congressional districts. Money that couldn't be diverted to the War effort by law. If NPR had some real patriots in it, they would have named names, but I guess that's too much to ask.

Collapse -
Hi holtnr
by Cindi Haynes / November 1, 2004 8:58 AM PST
Collapse -
Re:Up-armored vehicle effort?Effectiveness against injuries?
by Catgic / November 1, 2004 8:09 PM PST

Gary Motsek Sez:
?the effort to provide increased vehicle protection against grenades, improvised explosive devices and small-arms fire is progressing fast and furiously as demand continues to increase. Nearly 5,100 up-armored Humvees have been delivered to Army and Marine Corps units in Iraq, with another 724 on ships bound for the theater?:)

NPR Sez:
?most armor upgrades don't include under body armor, and that a remote controlled land mine is therefore just as deadly as it would be against an un-armored vehicle. Sad

The cause-effect test results of this Up-Armor installation effort will show up in the Casualty Stats. The added vehicle Up-Armor ?bullet-proofing? should ameliorate the daily combat death rate, which would be good news. Though the added Up-Armor vehicle effort helps increase trooper survivability when they?re inside the Humvees, it isn?t personal body armor and doesn?t directly stop insurgency combat volume and land mine & IED use.

Troopers saved from death in a combat incident by this ?soft armor? will, in some cases, still be seriously ?combat injured.? So for a given daily combat intensity, as the ?added armor protection? causes combat death rates to inch down, the combat injury rate may inch up a bit.

Up-Armored vehicles don?t offer protection to a Marine hunkered down behind a sand dune in a fire-fight. The budgeted ?non-defense related pork? called out by NPR, needs to be diverted to procure more personal body armor. The goal should be all G.I.s on-the-line, should be equipped with body armor.

Collapse -
Re: Up-armored vehicle effort.............
by Dan McC / November 1, 2004 11:15 PM PST

They'd have to do a two hour special to list the pork in any of these big ticket bills. NPR is calling a spade a spade, they just don't have the time to tell you who gets the steel spades and who gets the solid gold spades.

Welcome to Speakeasy!

Dan

Collapse -
Electromagnetic weaponry
by Dragon / November 1, 2004 9:52 PM PST

I saw a program on TV in which they said such a weapon could knock out roadside bombs. Another form could immobilize a mob by heating skin to 130 degrees, but without long term effects.

I think such tecnology may also be used in conjunction with the anti-missile missile program we have going. Since its difficult to actually -hit- missile with a missile, it could adversely affect guidance systems, disable the payload, or maybe even blow it up.

Popular Forums

icon
Computer Newbies 10,686 discussions
icon
Computer Help 54,365 discussions
icon
Laptops 21,181 discussions
icon
Networking & Wireless 16,313 discussions
icon
Phones 17,137 discussions
icon
Security 31,287 discussions
icon
TVs & Home Theaters 22,101 discussions
icon
Windows 7 8,164 discussions
icon
Windows 10 2,657 discussions

FALL TV PREMIERES

Your favorite shows are back!

Don’t miss your dramas, sitcoms and reality shows. Find out when and where they’re airing!