View Full Version : HUMVEE to be phased out?
incarcerated
02-14-2010, 16:56
http://www.theleafchronicle.com/article/20100214/OPINION01/2140309
Humvees ready to retire
February 14, 2010
It's unlikely that most soldiers who have served in Iraq or Afghanistan will mourn the demise of the Humvees — the High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicles.
The light utility vehicles never were intended to serve as armored cars. But that's exactly what soldiers needed when improvised explosive devices became the weapon of choice among the enemy in Iraq and then later Afghanistan. More than 1,700 deaths in Iraq alone led to demands that our soldiers be provided with better protection.
The Army, in turn, decided this year to end new money requests in its recent budget proposal.
The 2,620 vehicles ordered from the Mishawaka, Indiana-based AM General will be the last produced unless Congress steps in.
The budget does include $989 million for maintaining the current Humvee fleet so that the vehicles can be used on missions where it wouldn't be practical for its replacement, the heavily armored Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles or MRAPs....
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5i_Hllcq4twpwZRwPvMPzHo-gtwRAD9DQJE5G1
....The Army provided no new money for the Humvee in the service's recent budget proposal. Lt. Col. Jimmie Cummings, an Army spokesman, says the 2,620 vehicles ordered from Mishawaka, Ind.-based AM General will be the last as the Army moves on to newer designs.
Unless the decision is reversed, the Humvee will end a remarkable 30-year run that extended beyond the battlefield into popular culture....
Utah Bob
02-14-2010, 17:57
You can't replace all the Humvees with MRAPs. That's ridiculous. After 2011, then what. Keep repairing the old fleet?
There had better be a replacement utility vehicle on somebody's drawing board. (Hopefully not Toyota)
Bring back the Jeep I guess.:rolleyes:
Peregrino
02-14-2010, 18:47
FOSOV
incarcerated
02-14-2010, 18:49
You can't replace all the Humvees with MRAPs. That's ridiculous. After 2011, then what?
Obama will give us two options:
Kyobanim
02-14-2010, 21:03
That bike looks like it's already been up-armored
incarcerated
02-14-2010, 21:55
That bike looks like it's already been up-armored
It’s an Assault Bike.
At least in California it is.
Dozer523
02-15-2010, 08:34
Couldn't they just "upgrade" much of the Humvee fleet, like give it a more powerful engine, tougher transmission, tougher steering, etc...so that it can comfortably handle being armored up if necessary?
thinkin' pink?
The Reaper
02-15-2010, 08:59
IIRC, it was due to be replaced by something new.
Unfortunately, the money for that has been deleted/cut/reallocated.
And the service life of all our vehicles, both ground and air, have been seriously compromised due to the OPTEMPO. We have put on 20 years of use in 7 years. The normal life cycle replacements are years from coming into service, because we had not anticipated needing them so soon.
We are in a position now similar to the family who has a car that they planned to replace next year, but the savings had to be spent on something else, and at the same time, we had to take a job that requires driving four times as far as we had been traveling to get to work.
With the anticpated budget shortfalls, debt, and recession, there is not going to be an easy fix. We could be using these same HMMWVs for many decades.
TR
The MRAP is just a mobile version of the FOB mindset.
Stay on the road men, drive slow, drive safe, be careful...
I wonder how many decision makers have stock or job offers in the companies that stand to benefit from this debacle.
Dozer523
02-15-2010, 14:27
Pink?:confused:
Yeah. pink. Like being sarcastic. NO!??!!! "upgrade" much of the Humvee fleet, like give it a more powerful engine, tougher transmission, tougher steering, etc...so that it can comfortably handle being armored up if necessary THAT turned it into the POS it is now.
If you want to improve it stop improving it.
In the 80's when it came out, we took a bunch to Biggs AAF and srtipped them down and called them Desert Mobility Vehicle Systems. They came with a motorcycle (That we never got to use :(). Then we ran the crap out of them along the Border (with no weapons:eek: go figure, a gentler time?) You know those two right angles in southwest Arizona? I've been there.
Occassoinally violating the territorial intergrity of our southern neighbor.
"Ask that guy where we are."
"What makes you think I speak Spanish?"
"Isn't your first name Armando?"
"Doesn't mean I speak Spanish."
"I'll do it myself. . . (I took two years in High School). . . " Hola, Senior. Donde' es Mexico?"
"Mexico? Aqui es Mexico!"
"Mount up!"
ZonieDiver
02-15-2010, 16:42
Yeah. pink. Like being sarcastic. NO!??!!! "upgrade" much of the Humvee fleet, like give it a more powerful engine, tougher transmission, tougher steering, etc...so that it can comfortably handle being armored up if necessary THAT turned it into the POS it is now.
If you want to improve it stop improving it.
In the 80's when it came out, we took a bunch to Biggs AAF and srtipped them down and called them Desert Mobility Vehicle Systems. They came with a motorcycle (That we never got to use :(). Then we ran the crap out of them along the Border (with no weapons:eek: go figure, a gentler time?) You know those two right angles in southwest Arizona? I've been there.
Occassoinally violating the territorial intergrity of our southern neighbor.
"Ask that guy where we are."
"What makes you think I speak Spanish?"
"Isn't your first name Armando?"
"Doesn't mean I speak Spanish."
"I'll do it myself. . . (I took two years in High School). . . " Hola, Senior. Donde' es Mexico?"
"Mexico? Aqui es Mexico!"
"Mount up!"
One of the many things I like about Arizona is the number of "right angles" it possesses! :D
incarcerated
02-15-2010, 17:13
Don't worry. I am sure the chinese will build and sell us something high quality that we can counnt on. After all they are our friends now.
Don't give them any ideas!
plenty of folks with 100 pound brains developing shit that they will never use...
...and we HAVE to use it.
I heard a good story from a buddy of mine that is trying to bridge the gp between 100 pound brains and the soldiers they "punish"
The "100 pound brain" was visibly befuddled when he saw how hard it was to get in and out of a gazillion ton armored truck in full kit and NVGs on your head. The slide rule doesn't take cover the human factor.
...sure is easy to design combat vehicles when you wear khaki pants and a polo shirt.
incarcerated
02-16-2010, 00:06
You would think they would tell the engineers to take that kind of stuff into consideration....
Have you spent much time around engineers?
Slantwire
02-16-2010, 09:36
You would think they would tell the engineers to take that kind of stuff into consideration, or maybe even bring in ex-combat-arms soldiers to help with the design process.
Engineers are given requirements by their program managers. The PMs get the requirements from the DoD acquisitions offices. I don't know where the acquisitions guys get their requirements from - they never want to provide direct access. But every three weeks, they have new requirements to add, which generally requires changing at least two weeks worth of work each time.
Not a lot of former combat-arms types in program management. Even fewer with engineering degrees. Most former military work in Business Development (focusing on winning new contracts, not working on the ones in hand), and not many of them were ever combat-arms.
Utah Bob
02-16-2010, 10:22
Unfortunately, the money for that has been deleted/cut/reallocated.
TR
No super Humvees.
No moon base.
Life was full of promise when I was younger. Now it's just full of disappointments.
Sigh........:(
armymom1228
02-16-2010, 11:01
Originally Posted by The Reaper
Unfortunately, the money for that has been deleted/cut/reallocated.
R
No super Humvees.
No moon base.
Life was full of promise when I was younger. Now it's just full of disappointments.
Sigh........:(
Bob, apparently TR did not get the memo about the newest reallocation of funds for renewable/green transportation. The Army truly is with the times in climbing onto the 'green' transportation movement. :D
According to the latest issue of Car and Driver magazine, the replacement is the Oshkosh M-ATV (http://mobilelink.caranddriver.com/reviews/car/10q1/oshkosh_m-atv-specialty_file), but this article was probably written several months ago, and the budget situation may have changed.
I wonder how many decision makers have stock or job offers in the companies that stand to benefit from this debacle.At the risk of sounding uncharacteristically bitter, I would speculate that the phasing out of HUMVEEs will nicely dovetail with points made in the 2010 QDR that call for more UAVs. I think the Democratic Party believes that high tech solutions lead to high tech jobs which, in turn, leads to high tech voters.
It is all about transformation.
I think the Democratic Party believes that high tech solutions lead to high tech jobs which, in turn, leads to high tech voters.That approach worked so well during the Stansfield Turner era at the CIA...
ZonieDiver
02-16-2010, 17:59
That approach worked so well during the Stansfield Turner era at the CIA...
And we still haven't recovered from that! I never knew the Humvee...but sure hated to see the M-151 go.
Utah Bob
02-16-2010, 19:07
Bob, apparently TR did not get the memo about the newest reallocation of funds for renewable/green transportation. The Army truly is with the times in climbing onto the 'green' transportation movement. :D
I dunno. Looks like there could be some emissions issues there..:eek:
Engineers are given requirements by their program managers. The PMs get the requirements from the DoD acquisitions offices. I don't know where the acquisitions guys get their requirements from - they never want to provide direct access. But every three weeks, they have new requirements to add, which generally requires changing at least two weeks worth of work each time.
Not a lot of former combat-arms types in program management. Even fewer with engineering degrees. Most former military work in Business Development (focusing on winning new contracts, not working on the ones in hand), and not many of them were ever combat-arms.
The Materiel Command (AMC) gets the requirements for equipment performance from TRADOC. TRADOC gets its input from the commands, such as SOCOM, PACOM, etc. Those commands take input from "the schools", Knox, Benning, Bragg, and so on.
Those user needs, must climb x slope, travel at y mph, tow z tons, are turned into a performance specification. That spec is put out to the public, normally advertised in the Commerce Business Daily. All manufacturers who have a reasonable capability to produce are invited to build/submit prototypes.
The winning equipment is manufactured in small quantities for the first year, and the few produced are sent to the types of unit that will best represent the soldier. (ie, tanks don't go to QM units). After the user says "a little more of this and a little less of that' please....". the ramp-up to full production starts.
Many PMs that I know on the govt side are combat arms, and the Deputy is an engineer about 90% of the time. I don't know what those numbers are on the contractor side.
The acquisition guys do stand between the producing contractor and the Army side of the effort. The Army tries to keep the salesmen away from the troops. And, an engineer's "what if....." can be argued by a contractor to be a request for design change. I've seen that. The process is fairly logical IMO, but when congresscritters force requirements on the Army it all goes to hell, and the most the Army can do is damage control.
Great lets try once again to have the "1" vehicle for all-missions, all terrains, all the time.
Didn't we do this already........Wait for it......
Stryker sound familiar.
Those poor fellas were told that they had the best vehicle for Afghanistan and were told not only be me, the intel guy who listens to the 18 series, and the 18 series that their vehicle is good for open desert and roads.
Many a young trooper has paid the ultimate price for that stupidity.
I had the luxury of speaking directly to the JIEDDO director on my last government paid vacation. I asked one simple question that he, and his massive entourage of O-5/6's (who were appalled that a SSG had the balls to ask) didn't really have an answer for. Yes dickhead me playing stump the chump with a check-writer, but I couldn't resist.
"Why are we paying money to corporations to develop a vehicle that is blast resistant (Not Proof) when we could use about half the amount in the budget to address the source of the problem?"
Instead of creating a vehicle, go after the people building the bomb, the one resourcing the bomb maker, giving people jobs as an incentive to not build bombs.
We've created 2 industries by going to war these 2 times. An armor dream (nightmare depending on who you ask), and an industry in an area that has no economy except poppy and now the incentive to make a quick buck. That quick buck comes from payment for info, materials, emplacement, pot shots, full/part-time guerilla, and poppy.
But I'm preaching to the grandest choir of them all. ;)
AngelsSix
02-17-2010, 05:46
Have you spent much time around engineers?
[Scene Initech. Bob Slydell and Bob Porter are interviewing Tom.]
BOB SLYDELL
So what you do is you take the specifications from the customers and
you bring them down to the software engineers?
TOM
That, that's right.
BOB PORTER
Well, then I gotta ask, then why can't the customers just take the
specifications directly to the software people, huh?
TOM
Well, uh, uh, uh, because, uh, engineers are not good at dealing with
customers.
BOB SLYDELL
You physically take the specs from the customer?
TOM
Well, no, my, my secretary does that, or, or the fax.
BOB SLYDELL
Ah.
BOB PORTER
Then you must physically bring them to the software people.
TOM
Well...no. Yeah, I mean, sometimes.
BOB SLYDELL
Well, what would you say… you do here?
TOM
Well, look, I already told you. I deal with the goddamn customers so
the engineers don't have to!! I have people skills!! I am good at
dealing with people!!! Can't you understand that?!? WHAT THE HELL IS
WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?!!!!!!!
Utah Bob
02-17-2010, 06:18
Love the Bobs!:D
IMHO, Post #27 and #28 above (Plato and jbour13) outline conditions rampant throughout DoD. Not just an Army problem. Change the acronyms and leave the rest alone. Same-o/same-o. I spent the last 16yrs of my career working in acquisitions and T&E, and it was the most frustrating part of engineering mgmt to see the real knowledgable individuals about what combat arms people need being swept away by some used car butthead, a worthless SOB in plaid pants. The bean counters have become our design agents, and those in comabt arms have been relegated to be "oversight consultants". Spending goes thru the roof and quality (suitability and effectiveness) to complete the "mission" goes right down the crapper.
Many a young trooper has paid the ultimate price for that stupidity.
You're right.
"Why are we paying money to corporations to develop a vehicle that is blast resistant (Not Proof) when we could use about half the amount in the budget to address the source of the problem?"
Instead of creating a vehicle, go after the people building the bomb, the one resourcing the bomb maker, giving people jobs as an incentive to not build bombs.
Right again.
:mad:
In this book on military robotics....Is this book P.W. Singer's Wired for War (2009)?
Life imitating art? ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TBcQ8h_kXU&feature=related
Richard