Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Armored Vehicles Slow to Reach US Troops

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
RamboLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 12:17 AM
Original message
Armored Vehicles Slow to Reach US Troops
Source: ABC News/AP

The Pentagon will fall far short of its goal of sending 3,500 lifesaving armored vehicles to Iraq by the end of the year. Instead, officials expect to send about 1,500.

Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell said Wednesday that while defense officials still believe contractors will build about 3,900 of the mine-resistant, armor-protected vehicles by year's end, it will take longer for the military to fully equip them and ship them to Iraq.

"Production is on pace, the issue is delivery," he said, adding that the lag is a disappointment and the Defense Department is still committed to getting as many of the vehicles to the war as quickly as possible.

The vehicles known as MRAPs have a special V-shaped hull that provides greater protection against roadside bombs. According to the military, no troops have been killed while riding in one.

Once the MRAPs are built, the military installs necessary military equipment such as radios and radar then sends them to Iraq. Right now that process is taking about 50 days, but officials hope to shorten that to a little more than a month.

Read more:

These clowns would've lost WWII!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
soothsayer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 06:50 AM
Response to Original message
1. I always thought the real reason they don't provide proper armor is because
it makes the hummers too heavy and they sink in the sand. I figure they don't want to tell the "enemy" that the armor ain't comin'. But if they REALLY can provide some, and they aren't, or are dragging their feet about it, that's just soooooo effed up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Thothmes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 07:16 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. Armor
Don't think these are up armored hummers. Believe that they are a new vehical that is designed from the start to be an armored vehical.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
soothsayer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 09:24 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. ah, thanks!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
jmowreader Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-24-07 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. These are a new vehicle, and they're pretty big
The new vehicle is called an MRAP--mine-resistant, ambush-protected. They're pretty nice.

There are two drawbacks to putting serious armor on a Humvee (Hummers are what civilians buy):

The Humvee has a 135-horsepower engine. Armor being very heavy, if you put enough of it on the vehicle to make a difference the Humvee can't move fast enough. It also stresses the suspension and chassis, which were designed with the intention of being in a vehicle that weighs 6500 lbs, not 8500.

The Humvee also rides fairly low to the ground, so the belly plate must be flat. If you look at the bottom of a tank or one of these MRAPs, the bottom is curved or V-shaped. If a blast goes off under the vehicle, the shock follows the curve/V-shape around and dissipates. If a blast hits a flat-bottom vehicle, the laws of physics demand that the whole vehicle lift off the ground.

The smallest MRAP I've seen was made from a Ford F-650, which is a medium-duty truck whose bottom is about waist-high. They close the whole bottom in with a V-shaped belly plate.

This is what I really have to ask: The Army is spending big bucks on these vehicles. When they get them, the first thing they must do is send them to Tobyhanna Army Depot for installation of radios, radars and other such items. I may be wrong here, but since Motorola builds the radios, Raytheon the radars and so on and none of that equipment is being made by the Army, why in HELL can't those vendors just ship the necessary electronics to the MRAP upfitter? When that vehicle is released to the Army, it should be ready to be put on a C-17 and flown to Baghdad!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
tom_paine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 06:56 AM
Response to Original message
2. Are you kidding? The Bushies tried to take us over and bring us to Germany's side
Lost WWII, they would have WON it...for the Nazis.

And, lest you think I am exaggerating in the SLIGHTEST:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
DainBramaged Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 09:39 AM
Response to Original message
5. Didn't they find out about this a couple of years ago?
It's taken MORE than 2 years to get nearly half of what they promised into the field?

Support the troops, but let them die, the Republican way. :wtf:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Rambis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 10:32 AM
Response to Original message
6. Jump on this
Edited on Thu Aug-23-07 10:33 AM by Rambis
There have been many letters to the editor from troops railing against the dems for not funding the war. Dems are denying us these safer vehicles is the spin. How about * sending you the troops to fight ill prepared! They didn't have flak jackets or the right armored vehicles to begin with.
That shit needs to be taken into account when you send our troops into harms way to line your pockets.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
RamboLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 04:47 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Jon Soltz has jumped on this - this should be put in an ad!
What if 1,000 Armored Vehicles Didn't Get to Troops and No One Cared

In the news jumble today -- a new White House front group targeting Republicans on Iraq, Ari Fleischer not knowing the name of the veterans he used in the ads, the president saying we should have stayed in Vietnam while he was defending the airspace of Texas from the VC, and the tragic helicopter crash that killed 14 of our troops -- an important story is getting buried.

Reuters reports that "U.S. troops in Iraq will receive at least 1,000 fewer special armored vehicles than expected this year due to the amount of time needed for shipment."

This is unacceptable. Completely and utterly unacceptable. The issue of getting the most up to date Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles has been a problem for a while, and it's no closer to getting solved.

For years, the United States Marines have urgently requested MRAP vehicles for use in Iraq. Ever since a 2005 memo was sent up the chain of command by then-brigadier general Dennis Hejlik, the Bush administration's civilians in the Pentagon knew of the need for MRAP vehicles. Yet, it wasn't until March of this year that the Pentagon began to move on providing the 3,700 MRAP vehicles requested by the Marines, and over 17,000 requested by the Army. Even still, contract requests that were put out to eight companies didn't forsee production and distribution of the vehicles until 2009.

Now we're finding the ones we've produced can't be shipped quickly enough? That is an outrage. Senator Joseph Biden has it right. In response to the slow production schedule foreseen by the administration, Biden told USA Today, "You cannot tell me that this country is incapable in the next six months of building every single damn one of these vehicles that needs to be built."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Sep 23rd 2017, 03:12 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC