Marines want slow-down in deployment of IED-resistant vehicles

[MarkOttawa]

Marines Urge Caution on MRAP Fielding
Military.com, Oct. 19
http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,153219,00.html

Marine commanders in Iraq are asking the Pentagon to slow down deployment of IED-resistant vehicles in order to give them more time to figure out how best to employ the heavily-armored trucks, a top Corps official Wednesday.

Congress and the Pentagon have devoted billions to a crash program to field so-called Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles that are said to protect troops from deadly roadside bombs more effectively than up-armored Humvees. But the vehicles are more than four times heavier than an armored Humvee and may require different tactics for their use.

"I would say 'relax,' we don't know how we're going to use them, nobody does," said Brig. Gen. select Larry Nicholson, deputy commander of the Marine Corps Combat Development Command based in Quantico, Va. "And anyone who says ... 'this is exactly how many we need and this is exactly how we're going to use them' is not being truthful."

Commanders in Iraq are asking military officials in the U.S. to send "a few more" MRAPs, "then let us figure it out," Nicholson said during a panel discussion on the future of the MRAP, sponsored by the non-partisan Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, a defense think tank with close Pentagon ties.

The push-back from the field stands in sharp contrast to Pentagon moves to field more than 15,000 MRAPs over the next two years, including 1,500 by the end of 2007. The Marine Corps has an estimated 380 MRAPs in service with II Marine Expeditionary Force in al Anbar province so far, and the service is forecasted to receive a total of 3,700 MRAPs...

More on MRAPS:
http://www.defense-update.com/products/m/mrap.htm

Then there's this:

Will MRAPs become white elephants?
Christian Science Monitor, Oct. 19
http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/1019/p03s03-usmi.htm

After a slow and controversial start, the military is furiously trying to get enough Mine Resistant, Ambush Protected vehicles, or MRAPs, into Iraq.

In fact, it is Defense Secretary Robert Gates's biggest priority when it comes to protecting troops in Iraq. But as his department scrambles to provide enough bomb-resistant vehicles, with plans to have as many as 1,500 MRAPs there by the end of the year, concern is emerging that the massive vehicles will become tomorrow's white elephant.

There is no question that the vehicles save lives: The up-armored trucks with their V-shaped hull protect troops from all but the largest types of explosive devices, allowing them often to walk away from some attacks that they would not have probably survived in up-armored Humvees, which are far more common in Iraq.

Yet in and outside the Pentagon, the concern is that such heavy investment in the expensive vehicles this late in the game comes with a greater price. The fear is that the average $800,000-per-unit cost and 22-ton weight of some of the vehicles may undermine military missions beyond Iraq.

Even during the current counterinsurgency, insulating US troops from the local population in these vehicles runs counter to the kinds of tactics US troops are typically employing in Iraq.

Marine Commandant Gen. James Conway supports the MRAP and said Monday the program "was the right thing to do." But thinking ahead, the Corps' top general is concerned that his service's traditional missions could be hindered by the costly and heavy truck that is virtually impossible to transport easily. General Conway also believes the truck is contributing to the Corps losing its "expeditionary flavor."

"Can I give a satisfactory answer to what we're going to be doing with those things in five or 10 years? Probably not," he told a group Monday at the Center for a New American Security, a new think tank in Washington...

Meanwhile:

Pentagon Contract Announcement
(Source: US Department of Defense; issued Oct. 18, 2007)
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/cgi-bin/client/modele.pl?session=dae.30301261.1192803514.NcSJrX8AAAEAABAfd3kAAAAk&manuel_call_prod=87246&manuel_call_mod=release&modele=jdc_inter

The US Department of Defense has awarded four contracts for the supply of 2,400 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles of different categories, for a combined value of $1.208 billion, as detailed below: 
 
-- International Military and Government LLC (IMG), Warrenville, Ill., is being awarded $509,241,000 for firm-fixed-priced delivery order #0005 under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for 1,000 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) Category I Low Rate Initial Production vehicles. 
Category I is a MRAP vehicle used by the Marine Corps and other Joint Forces for convoy operations. 
The MRAP vehicles are required to increase the survivability and mobility of troops operating in hazardous fire areas against known threats such as improvised explosive devices, small arms fire and mines. 
Work will be performed in West Point, Miss., and work is expected to be completed April 2008. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was competitively procured. 
The Marine Corps Systems Command, Quantico, Va., is the contracting activity. 


--Force Protection Industries, Inc., Ladson, S.C., is being awarded $376,644,117 for firm-fixed-priced delivery order #0006 under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5031) for the purchase of 553 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) Category I vehicles and 247 MRAP Category II vehicles and vehicle sustainment Integrated Logistic Support. 
Work will be performed in Ladson, S.C., and work is expected to be completed April 2008. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was competitively procured. 
The Marine Corps Systems Command, Quantico, Va., is the contracting activity. 


-- BAE Systems Land & Armaments, LP, Ground Systems Division, York, Pa., is being awarded $278,441,800 firm fixed priced delivery order #0005 under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5025) for the purchase of 399 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) Category II vehicles and 112 MRAP Category II Ambulance Variant vehicles. 
Work will be performed in York, Pa., and work is expected to be completed by April 2008. Contract funds will not expire by the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was competitively procured. 
The Marine Corps Systems Command, Quantico, Va., is the contracting activity. 


-- BAE Systems Land & Armaments, LP, Ground Systems Division, York, Pa., is being awarded $44,339,800 for firm fixed priced delivery order #0004 under previously awarded contract ( M67854-07-D-5025) for the purchase of 89 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicle Category I United States Special Operations Command Variants and vehicle sustainment Integrated Logistic Support. 
Work will be performed in York, Pa., and is expected to be completed by March 2008. Contract funds will not expire by the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was competitively procured. 
The Marine Corps Systems Command, Quantico, Va., is the contracting activity. (ends) 

U.S. Marine Corps Orders More MaxxPro MRAP Vehicles from Navistar Affiliate

(Source: Navistar International Corp.; issued Oct. 18, 2007)

WARRENVILLE, Ill. ---The U.S. Marine Corps today ordered 1,000 additional International MaxxPro military vehicles valued at approximately $509 million from Navistar International Corporation. 

The new order, through Navistar’s International Military and Government, LLC affiliate, brings Navistar’s total orders for Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles to 2,971 MaxxPro vehicles. The additional order is for Category I MRAP vehicles to be delivered by the end of April 2008. MRAP vehicles are designed to protect troops from roadside bombs, improvised explosive devices (IEDs) and other threats. 

“We are bringing to the U.S. Military Navistar’s advantages in manufacturing, engineering, parts and service and more,” said Daniel C. Ustian, chairman, president and chief executive officer of Navistar International Corporation. “We continue to work closely with the U.S. military and our supply base to meet the aggressive demand and expand production capacity at our facilities. We are honored to provide these mission critical vehicles to the U.S. military.” 

In just two months of production, the Navistar affiliate has delivered 188 MaxxPro vehicles to the military and is on a path to achieve production of 500 per month by February. In September Navistar was also awarded $71.5 million to provide parts support for the Marine Corps. 

“We are leveraging our manufacturing expertise in the commercial truck and engine industry to provide quality, durable military vehicles as fast as possible,” said Archie Massicotte, President of International Military and Government, LLC. “As the largest commercial truck and mid-range diesel engine manufacturer in North America, we offer a number of advantages: we produced more than 161,000 commercial vehicles last year, we know how to mass produce quality vehicles.” 

International utilizes a state of the art modular armor concept, developed in conjunction with Plasan Sasa, to armor its MaxxPro vehicles. Plasan Sasa, a world-class provider of armor solutions, is rapidly expanding its capacity and focusing dedicated resources on meeting the increasing MRAP demand for MaxxPro vehicles. The design positions the v-shaped crew compartment on top of International’s proven heavy-duty truck chassis. The v-shaped hull is designed to deflect blasts away from the truck to minimize impact around the crew area. 

“We are committed to delivering these MaxxPro’s as soon as possible to help protect our military,” said Massicotte. 

Navistar International Corporation is a holding company whose wholly owned subsidiaries produce International brand commercial trucks, MaxxForce brand diesel engines, IC brand school buses, and Workhorse brand chassis for motor homes and step vans. International Military and Government LLC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of International Truck and Engine Corporation.

 

I assume the vehicles from Force Protection Industries are the same as the  Buffaloes and Cougars we're buying:
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2007/05/buffaloes-and-cougars-for-afstan.html

Mark
Ottawa

 

[tomahawk6]

The MRAP buy has pretty much shelved the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle program, at least for now.

 

[MarkOttawa]

Maybe the MRAPs should be kept at home:

IEDs Seen As Rising Threat in The U.S.
As Preparedness Is Criticized, Bush Works on a Plan
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/19/AR2007101902703.html?hpid=topnews

Mark
Ottawa

 

[tomahawk6]

I can see excess MRAP's being sold to locl police departments. ;D

 

[razorguns]

Most new armor bad boys i've seen so far - have all failed miserably when tested in duty.  And new reports out of iraq - they're all failing big time.  They're about as safe as those new dragon body armors.

How they handle in the field, and how they handle in a controlled lab is usually way different.

Of course every defense company wants those lucrative contracts - so they'll say anything to get the purchase orders.

Oh they failed?  Sucks, guess we gotta make a new model - oh, and you gotta place a new order for those vehicles!  All spells $.

r

 

[Big Red]

Most new armor bad boys i've seen so far - have all failed miserably when tested in duty.  And new reports out of iraq - they're all failing big time.  They're about as safe as those new dragon body armors.

How they handle in the field, and how they handle in a controlled lab is usually way different.

Of course every defense company wants those lucrative contracts - so they'll say anything to get the purchase orders.

Oh they failed?  Sucks, guess we gotta make a new model - oh, and you gotta place a new order for those vehicles!  All spells $.

r

When you come over to Iraq you're going to be glad someone was spending money on armor research for you.  The equipment now may not be perfect but it's a far cry from the welded on mild steel plate armor of a few years ago.

 

[KevinB]

When you come over to Iraq you're going to be glad someone was spending money on armor research for you.  The equipment now may not be perfect but it's a far cry from the welded on mild steel plate armor of a few years ago.

+1

Nothing like that false sence of security mild steel gives you....

 

[razorguns]

When you come over to Iraq you're going to be glad someone was spending money on armor research for you.  The equipment now may not be perfect but it's a far cry from the welded on mild steel plate armor of a few years ago.

there's so much politics, backroom financial deals, and political wrangling about all these contracts, it's crazy.

r

 

[MarkOttawa]

Military thinks twice on fortified trucks
http://www.latimes.com/news/la-na-mrap27dec27,0,3353495.story?coll=la-tot-topstories&track=ntothtml

It was just what American soldiers had been longing for -- a patrol vehicle designed to withstand the powerful roadside bombs that have killed more service members than any other insurgent weapon in the Iraq war.

But as the Defense Department hits its year-end goal of delivering 1,500 heavily armored, V-hulled "mine-resistant ambush-protected" trucks to Iraq, the feeling in the Pentagon is far from elation. Instead, an intense debate has broken out over whether the vehicle that is saving lives also could undermine one of the most important lessons of the whole war: how to counter an insurgency.

Though offering needed armor, the MRAP lacks the agility vital to urban warfare. "It's very heavy; it's relatively large; it's not as maneuverable as you'd like it to be," Gen. William S. Wallace, the officer in charge of Army doctrine and training, said recently. "All of those things should be of concern."

But with nearly 12,000 of the trucks on order in a program that has a projected cost of more than $17 billion, the MRAP -- the most expensive new Army weapons system acquired since the Sept. 11 attacks -- is likely to influence how the Army fights future wars.

Geoff Morrell, the Pentagon press secretary, said MRAPs are an important part of the military's response to the needs of U.S. soldiers in Iraq.

"There is never one silver-bullet solution for all the problems you find in war," Morrell said. "The key is to find a combination of things that address the problems."

Support for MRAPs within the Pentagon has weakened recently, in part because of the decline in military casualties in Iraq. With roadside bombings diminishing, the military services worry that they will be saddled in the near future with thousands of large, heavy, expensive trucks that they will no longer need.

But more fundamentally, the MRAP has reignited a debate that has bedeviled strategists since the war began: Is the best way to save soldiers' lives to give them tools to survive attacks, or to prevent the attacks?

On one side of the argument are senior officials in Washington, including Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.), who have insisted that MRAPs are a moral imperative, needed to protect vulnerable soldiers from death and dismemberment.

But a growing number of counterinsurgency experts, prodded by an October report by influential Pentagon consultant Andrew F. Krepinevich Jr., have argued that the hulking vehicles are antithetical to fighting a guerrilla war...

Earlier this month, Marine Corps officials announced they were cutting the number of MRAPs they intended to buy, to 2,300 from 3,600, citing the reduced violence in Iraq and the questionable utility of the vehicles in other missions.

Army officials, who were planning the largest purchases, are considering a similar move.

Under pressure from both Gates and Capitol Hill, Army officials said earlier this year that they would replace all Humvees in Iraq with MRAPs, a total of 17,700 vehicles.

In the last month, however, Army officers have said they see a long-term need for, at most, 10,000 of the MRAPs -- which cost $500,000 to $1 million apiece, depending on the model. Officers in Baghdad and Washington now are reevaluating whether they should ask Congress for money next year to buy more, or whether 10,000 is already too many...

Mark
Ottawa

 

[razorguns]

i see the argument.

i'd rather be in a zippy vehicle going 30mph around neighborhoods doing my patrols...

than sit inside a big hulk of a tank, going 5mph, having insurgents and kids laughing and pointing at me as they can run faster than my flintstonemobile.

if you just want to sit inside a large soldier babysitter on wheels - why even leave the wire?

r

 

[FoverF]

It seems to me that the Marine Corps approach prefers to see the MRAP given to units that are NOT on the pointy end of things. It's natural to want to give the armour to guys doing the shooting, but it's CSS guys, and road convoys who are getting hit with most of the IEDs. They do indeed want 'zippy vehicles doing patrols', but when a bunch of guys are doing an administrative move down a highway from one 'wired' compound to another, the armoured flintstonemobile might be exactly what is needed.

if you just want to sit inside a large soldier babysitter on wheels - why even leave the wire?

I believe that the idea is to use it mainly for guys that they don't want to leave the wire. It's for guys who just need to get from Camp Blank to the airport, and not get killed while doing it.

If it's used properly it's not going to reduce the 'face-time' that your soldiers get with the population, because the soldiers interacting with the populace aren't going to be using it, only the guys who are going to be zipping by in a convoy anyways.

If it's used improperly, you're going to have big problems, as line units get stuck with a vehicle that sounds good to the TV news audience at home, but gets stuck in alleys, collapses bridges, burns a shed-load of gas, and gets them laughed at by insurgents who can outrun it on foot.

Deciding who gets it, and how exactly to use it properly, is easier said than done, which is why the slow-down in deployment makes sense.

 

[tomahawk6]

The Army and Marines are going to buy fewer MRAP's because they arent needed. They are harder to maintain. They tie up funds needed for other projects the services will need in the future.

 

[razorguns]

word that.

people forget - when u get new vehicles, you gotta get new parts, training on maintaining them, training on auto-body/reparing them, training on driving them...

and to be honest with you, most of these 'ied-resilient' vehicles fail miserably.  didn't some canadian soldiers die this year in a brand new spiffy vehicle they had just gotten?

i'd rather the funds be used to bribe insurgents for info. 

r

 

[LineDoggie]

I keep hearing the phrase "Failed Miserably" but I see no proof of that.

I've seen Buffalos with the "Iron Claw" units take hits and protect the crews.

I used to Patrol Route Irish in Baghdad, and those Mine-Resistant Vehicles looked pretty damn tough to me. I dont recall seeing them all junked in the Class I yards being Canniballized like the M1025's, M1114's. In Talking with an Engineer Brother who served in an IronClaw Unit he says in a Year on Route Tampa his unit suffered no casualties in the Improved Vehicles, only from the M1025's.

But then I suppose he doesnt have an axe to grind...

 

[MrWhyt]

most of these 'ied-resilient' vehicles fail miserably.

If by "fail miserably" you mean "aren't 100% IED proof" then yes I guess they do, but by that same standard the M1 Abrams has failed miserably as well.

 

[aesop081]

Razorguns 's view is that of one US Army specialist. Consider it accordingly.

 

[LineDoggie]

OK, now I understand where he's coming from.  We (My Unit ) would have Killed for some of these while incountry. The only hesitation I can think of is the Weight. I've had personal experience with Iraqi Roads Near Canals Collapsing under the weight of an M1114. Trust me, it isnt fun to suddenly be upside down under water of, shall we say "Dubious Potability" and trying to get out.

For Places like Anbar, and Baghdad proper, this looks like a winner, Radwiniyah, Taji not so much(too many Canal Roads. Light Bridges)

 

[Dog]

My first thought when I read the article was: "Of all the problems that they could be having... having TOO much kit is a nice one to have."

I understand that it is a real problem, but at least they aren't having any problems when it comes to supply...