Jump to content
12Alfa

Hummer replacment

Recommended Posts

http://www.bbc.com/autos/story/20150828-inside-the-oshkosh-jltv-the-us-militarys-new-hummer-replacement?ocid=auto.ppc.kwe.we.0.feb_ca&kwp_0=111237&kwp_4=537118&kwp_1=286497

 

What I find a bit strange is why the US sold, or gave away so many of this type just to award another big contract, wait.....ok, I got itB|

 

And all a long I thought that there was debt issue south of my border, can't believe everything we see. Hope this project is welcomed by the units, I like them for the protection, and operationally readiness, and oh ya the ACxD

 

Humvee's will be sold a bargain prices I would think.:ph34r:

Edited by 12Alfa
Cause I can

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, ferrying back equipment stateside is also a substantial cost factor (and it increases the risk for everybody while you're drawing down). If the vehicles aren't in a good shape anymore (be it bullet holes, or normal wear and tear) it may actually be a reasonable decision to abandon the gear in the field/donate it to the local authorities. I suppose one would have to look at the actual numbers to get an idea how much of a folly the decision really is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Tacbat said:

There's no replacement for a good, uh, Humvee...

Other than they have more inside room than our G Wagons there is not much difference I found. I did enjoy the roll-over training, and deploying the anchor every time we stopped:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll just leave this here.

Quote

Although the Army plans to buy 49,100 JLTVs and the Marine Corps 5,500, they are not a one-for-one replacement for the Humvee and both services will still be left operating large fleets. For the Marines, 69 JLTVs will replace the 74 Humvees in all active infantry battalions to cover its expeditionary forces. The Marine JLTV order is planned to be completed by 2022, leaving the remainder of the Corps' 13,000-strong Humvee force scattered around support organizations while soft-skinned Humvees will provide support behind the forward deployed Marine Expeditionary Unit. The Army does not plan to replace Humvees in the Army National Guard, and is considering options on how many of its 120,000 vehicles will be replaced, sustained, or modernized. Even if half of the force is replaced by JLTVs, the entire planned order will not be complete until 2040. If upgrades are chosen for the remaining Humvees, the cost would likely have to not exceed $100,000 per vehicle.[39]The Humvee is expected to remain in U.S. military service until at least 2050.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It makes quite a lot of sense, since JLTV is so heavy it wouldn't be able to cross many European bridges, especially in the countryside.

 

I also have my doubts about it's performance in mud - the heavier, the worse. During the 2002 floods, it was not uncommon to see Lada Niva or UAZ 469 towing far heavier 4x4 Opel Fronteras and Jeep Cherokees out of mud.

 

I have the impression that the army tends to go from the extreme to the extreme, here, sacrificing cross-country mobility (unless you're jumping AfPak rocks) for the IED protection. So, the fact they are to retain at least some Humwees means there still is some common sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, JustSomeGuy said:

It makes quite a lot of sense, since JLTV is so heavy it wouldn't be able to cross many European bridges, especially in the countryside.

 

I also have my doubts about it's performance in mud - the heavier, the worse. During the 2002 floods, it was not uncommon to see Lada Niva or UAZ 469 towing far heavier 4x4 Opel Fronteras and Jeep Cherokees out of mud.

 

I have the impression that the army tends to go from the extreme to the extreme, here, sacrificing cross-country mobility (unless you're jumping AfPak rocks) for the IED protection. So, the fact they are to retain at least some Humwees means there still is some common sense.

 I don't understand this. As of today we have .5 to 40 ton tractor+trailers crossing those bridges, so my question would be why not a 8 ton JLTV .

Now granted some country (back roads) bridges will be a bit more fragile, but I would think a 8 ton veh should have access to most road systems, would it not?

In Afstgan we crossed all bridges with our MRAP's, not so much with our Max-Pro's.

 

And as a Jeep TJ Wrangler owner (on my 7th now). I find it very hard to believe that a Lada can outperform a Jeep, just sayingB|

Edited by 12Alfa
Cause I can

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not those bridges. I mean the countryside bridges, like this one ("single vehicle 18 tons"), only with even less allowed load:

q6F1mNo.jpg

 

I've seen bridges with max. allowed load as low as 6 tons, I believe. Only for civilian traffic or agricultural tractors. Not even lorries. So far, Humwees were able to utilize even these low-load bridges and heavy armor and logistics was forced to go through the more massive bridges. Now, even infantry would have to go through the heavy armor bottlenecks, thus allowing the enemy more opportunity for ambushes, airstrikes, artillery ambushes, sabotage etc.

 

About the Jeep stuff, well it was Cherokee, not Wrangler, and the Niva towed it out because it's narrower tires "cut" through the mud further and was able to make firmer contact with ground.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, JustSomeGuy said:

Not those bridges. I mean the countryside bridges, like this one ("single vehicle 18 tons"), only with even less allowed load:

q6F1mNo.jpg

 

I've seen bridges with max. allowed load as low as 6 tons, I believe. Only for civilian traffic or agricultural tractors. Not even lorries. So far, Humwees were able to utilize even these low-load bridges and heavy armor and logistics was forced to go through the more massive bridges. Now, even infantry would have to go through the heavy armor bottlenecks, thus allowing the enemy more opportunity for ambushes, airstrikes, artillery ambushes, sabotage etc.

 

About the Jeep stuff, well it was Cherokee, not Wrangler, and the Niva towed it out because it's narrower tires "cut" through the mud further and was able to make firmer contact with ground.

 

So a 8T veh should be ok for most of the transportation nodes there.

 

Well after some 35+ years of off-roading both as a mi,l and as a civi I can tell you that narrow tires do not come close to off-road mud tires. Our Mil g-wagons have narrow ones, and they do well for what there made for, however when I drive the same route in my 33" mud ties I can go much further. For mud you need the right tires, same for snow. The stock Cherokee comes with all-seasons, and in my opinion they are barely rain tires, they are crap, I had both of my kids replace them with proper snow/mud (they both drive jeeps as well).

I have gone through mud so deep in was coming in the door that were off, so ya,mud tires for mud, and snow tires for snow and they will out preform any narrow tire.

My brother once had a Niva ,i'll leave it at that:ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...