All we need is a fifth-wheel setup on the rear ends of all those M1's...
U.S. Central Command has added armor to 22,000 of its 30,000 fleet
SPECIAL TO WORLD TRIBUNE.COM
Friday, December 10, 2004
The United States has satisfied about 70 percent of the military's combat armored vehicle requirements in the Middle East and surrounding regions.
Officials said that over the last year the U.S. Army has vastly increased the number of combat and support military vehicles that received armor. They said the aim was to armor every vehicle deployed by the U.S. military in the Middle East, Persian Gulf, South Asia and Central Asia regions.
Officials and soldiers said the accelerated rate of production has been insufficient to achieve the army's goal to armor its entire vehicle fleet in Iraq. They said the result has been a significant shortage of armored vehicles particularly among transport and support units, which has affected supplies to U.S. troops in Iraq.
At the same time, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld echoed the Pentagon assessment that armored vehicles don't guarantee troop safety. He cited the destruction of U.S. main battle tanks from mines, and other officials said 120 up-armored Humvees were destroyed by insurgency attacks in Iraq, Middle East Newsline reported.
"You can have all the armor in the world on a tank and a tank can be blown up," Rumsfeld said.
Defense Department officials said U.S. contractors were cranking out hundreds of armored Humvees per month for the army. They said that only 15 months ago production of armored Humvees was about 30 per month.
On Dec. 8, Rumsfeld, meeting U.S. forces in Kuwait, was told that army units were digging through local landfills for "pieces of scrap metal and compromised ballistic glass to up-armor our vehicles."
Rumsfeld responded that production capability marked a key element in the acquisition of up-armored kits for military vehicles deployed in Iraq.
"The army has been pressing ahead to produce the armor necessary at a rate that they believe," Rumsfeld said. "It's a greatly expanded rate from what existed previously — but, at a rate that they believe is the rate that is all that can be accomplished at this moment."
The U.S. military set a requirement of 8,100 up-armored Humvees, of which about 6,000 were being produced, officials said. They said that about 22,000 of Central Command's fleet of 30,000 vehicles have received some form of armor.
Over the last few months, the army has expanded the up-armor effort to include non-combat vehicles in Iraq, officials said. They said the army has added armor to 507 heavy tactical trucks, 492 medium tactical vehicles, two heavy equipment trailers, eight M-915 trucks and 187 palletized load system vehicles that serve in Iraq. The army has operated four depots, two arsenals and one ammunition plant for the production of the armor kits.
Lt. Gen. Steve Whitcomb, commander of the U.S. Third Army, outlined three levels of up-armoring. In a briefing on Thursday, Whitecomb said Level One, manufactured in the United States, provides glass and other armament on the side, front, rear, top and bottom of the vehicle. He said slightly under 6,000 vehicles have received such protection.
Another 10,000 vehicles have received Level 2 protection, or the installation of add-on armor on existing vehicles. Whitcomb said such work has taken place in Iraq and Kuwait. Whitcomb said Level 2 does not provide protection at the top or bottom of the vehicle.
The lowest level, regarded as an interim measure, was termed Level 3, or hardening. This involved the welding of steel plates on military vehicles.
"Our real focus for the Level 3 armor is not the Humvees," Whitcomb said. "It's really the series of trucks that the army uses in combat operations. We're not doing it in large numbers yet. We're doing it where we can. We're building a capacity to be able to do that more frequently, to refurbish the fleet. But that is an issue."
Officials said the army has decided to produce armor add-on kits for all wheeled vehicles deployed to Iraq and the rest of the area under U.S. Central Command. The command is responsible for most of the Middle East, Persian Gulf, Central Asia and South Asia.
Pentagon spokesman Larry Di Rita said the decision to launch add-on armor production took place around August 2003 amid in an increase in insurgency bombing attacks on U.S. combat vehicles and covoys in Iraq. Di Rita said army commanders determined that combat troops and support units were not sufficiently protected from rocket-propelled grenades, mortars and roadside bombs, known in the military as improvised explosive devices.
In Iraq, Di Rita, said, commanders no longer permit unarmored vehicles to drive alone. Instead, they have been placed in convoys with combat armored vehicles.
"Commanders there at that point started to face this growing improvised explosive device challenge and said that they would like to have higher numbers of armored Humvees than they had originally projected," Di Rita said.
In December, the Pentagon awarded a $6.6 million contract to O'Gara-Hess & Eisenhardt Armoring Armoring for support of up-armored Humvees for the army. The Fairfield, Ohio-based company was contracted to complete the project by December 2007.
Officials said that in 2004, the army has been producing about 450 armored Humvees per month. They said the armor add-on kits were being fitted on to the 19,000 Humvees in the U.S. Central Command area of operations.
So far, 15,000 Humvees have been fitted with armor. The command has a total of 30,000 vehicles and officials said about 8,000 of them have no form of armor protection.
"While armor provides protection, it is not the be-all and end-all for security," Pentagon spokesman Maj. Paul Swiergosz said. "The army's IED Task Force and the Center for Army Lessons Learned have provided as much, if not more, protection for our forces by sharing tactics, techniques and procedures to help counter IED attacks."
http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtri...eaking_10.html
"Above all, we must realize that no arsenal, or no weapon in the arsenals of the world, is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women. It is a weapon our adversaries in today's world do not have."
"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'"
NEVER FORGET
All we need is a fifth-wheel setup on the rear ends of all those M1's...
USS North Dakota
We have a bigger insurgency and terroist hassle.
I wonder why we are not armouring everything.
Of course, our is not an armour oriented environment.
The worst part is that we are not allowed artillery, air force to bomb and raze, gunships to kill as is common in Iraq!
All because the Human Right swines will raise Cain and supported by pinkos in the West!
When will folks realise terrorism is the same everywhere?
Last edited by Ray; 12 Dec 04, at 18:24.
Good question...Originally Posted by Ray
No man is free until all men are free - John Hossack
I agree completely with this Administration’s goal of a regime change in Iraq-John Kerry
even if that enforcement is mostly at the hands of the United States, a right we retain even if the Security Council fails to act-John Kerry
He may even miscalculate and slide these weapons off to terrorist groups to invite them to be a surrogate to use them against the United States. It’s the miscalculation that poses the greatest threat-John Kerry
Sir,Originally Posted by Ray
Do you mean to tell us that you've fought Fullajah type engagements with just plain foot infantry?
Chimo
If they did i bet that was a barrel of monkeys...
ah...I was wondering where the terrorists got their bravery.![]()
What?Originally Posted by Julie
No man is free until all men are free - John Hossack
I agree completely with this Administration’s goal of a regime change in Iraq-John Kerry
even if that enforcement is mostly at the hands of the United States, a right we retain even if the Security Council fails to act-John Kerry
He may even miscalculate and slide these weapons off to terrorist groups to invite them to be a surrogate to use them against the United States. It’s the miscalculation that poses the greatest threat-John Kerry
I bet it was. I don't even want to think about that.Originally Posted by M21Sniper
Makes you wonder though. The Indian Army was obviously successful with far less dependence on technology than we do.
1) Are we overlooking something?
2) Are we in a self built trap?
Chimo
Sole foot soldier tactics, would be more of a guerilla warfare....that is the form of terrorist fighting. Less technology and intelligence keeps terrorists unorganized and sporadic. Just my opinion.Originally Posted by Confed999
I would like more information from the Brigadier but on the surface, this is attrition warfare. One dead terrorist for every one dead soldier. We can afford to lose soldiers. They cannot afford to lose terrorists.Originally Posted by Julie
Very unfortunate truth about attrition. However, I really want more info from the good Brigadier.
Chimo
The attrition rate for InA was for every soldier killed, it was around 4-6 terrorists.Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers
I could be wrong. There was a website that kept a tally of all the terrorists killed in Kashmir and a tally of soldiers and paramilitary commandoes killed.
I can't find the website right now.
Here it is.
http://www.armyinkashmir.org/v2/stat...rrorists.shtml
Click on the left for foreign terrorists and it will tell you how many terrorists India killed per year.
But no info for # of Indian soldiers killed.
Another to look at.
http://indianarmy.nic.in/araid.htm
Again no info on # of soldiers killed.
I think this is a very interesting thought. Terrorist qualify as guerilla warfare because they are comprised of pockets of irregular soldiers, making surprised raids. These pockets of terrorists do use the process of attrition by gradually wearing or weaking coalition forces by these surprised raids/attacks. Terrorists have no technology or armored vehicles. They can't afford to lose terrorists? Who are "they?" And are "they" the ones arming and paying these terrorists for the attacks? If we can use technology and intelligence to find out who "they" are, the US can get out of this self-built trap.Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers
![]()
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Share this thread with friends: