Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.
Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Okie Corral' started by NeverMore1701, Oct 24, 2012.
Great...we've been needing a humvee with less armor than ever. Maybe an open top would be good. That's sure to be popular and handy.
I'm betting special forces show a preference for worn out 1151's over that.
Pssh, always the pessimist. Think of the savings on IED materials required for those!
But I would like to own one to drive around the mean streets of Tampa. Its like a Jeep on steroids.
I don't give a rat's about military applications, I want one for me!
In some areas, SF uses humvees that are very similar to that. They like the ultra-lightweight vehicles for the offroad capability, with armor in only a few places (like the seats). Those vehicles have a M249 mounted on the side of the open back of the vehicle. The open design lets them deploy dismounts rapidly.
It all depends on the operational environment. There are plenty of places that an 1151 will be sluggish and stuck often.
I prefer even lighter for my SF operations
Spec ops need only horses and bayonets.
I was in SF once. I saw two guys (I think they were guys) riding one. Was that you?
How much armor did the original Jeep have? I wonder if we end-all/be-all'd transportation and have sacrificed all around. I'm not boots on the ground, so I don't know. I'm just asking the question: Should we have multiple vehicle types instead of one that is seemingly for everything?
When you are driving in an area where people routinely try to blow up the vehicle you are riding in then one with armor is necessary.
The article states there's different up armored packages available for multi configurations depending on need.
I get that. War is different than it was 30 years ago. . . I think.
Were people trying to blow our 2.5's and Jeeps in WW2? How about Vietnam? Are the bombs getting worse because our armor is getting stronger? Are injuries actually on the rise BECAUSE of the armor?
On the surface, these may seem like stupid questions. And on the surface, it also may seem "stupid" to lower tax rates on a permanent basis in order to stimulate tax revenue. But the fact is, getting to X often means heading to Y.
I'm honestly just curious.
Another one: What's the NEXT war zone going to look like? Craphole desert/mountains like now or jungles/forest? Is this set-up right for us where we will likely go next?
that would be a fun daily driver.
Co-worker went to the sand box twice. He said they had to reinforce their Humvee's with whatever sheet metal they could get. Apparently, they offered little protection as delivered. Often not enough even after being modified. An RC vehicle to run ahead would be even better.
The damn thing doesn't even have a bumper! They don't have much protection. It was my complaint when they first came out. All it means is another gub'ment contractor gets to make a ton of money on a second contract for armor plus instal instead of the original contract having the appropriate protection that it should include.
Yes, but dynamic front warfare, to get a 155mm artillery shell next to your truck would require a skilled FO, a good gun crew, perfect atmospheric conditions, and luck.
In contiguous front warfare, to get a 155mm right under your vehicle only takes patience.
IbisTek will make you any bumper you want- low pro, cow catcher, winch, rhino, etc...
I'll take my armor by an armor specialist, bumper by a bumper specialist, etc...
I like it. I was Marine infantry and started driving an M151-A1. Small and quick had some advantages.
I had the opportunity to cross train with some SpecOp type units including some of our allies. There is a real place for speed over protection in their world.
If I win the lottery, this will be parked in one of my garages...
I took that pic yesterday at AUSA.
You should have seen some of the "NO PHOTOGRAPHY" stuff they had out there...
I guess I'm alone in my thinking that it looks like someone beat the **** out of an old Humvee with an ugly stick to make this one?