Army Moving Forward With Tactical Vehicles

[Kris Kolman]

Army is moving forward with the HUMVEE replacement... Ford's Power Stroke 6.7-liter turbodiesel engine is powering BAE Systems offering.

 

http://www.aviationw...P-vXvLcjM.email

 

http://www.thevalanx.com/

 

[SoonerLS]

Hmm...an Army vehicle from a British company. At least this time it could be sending out clouds of smoke on purpose... :hysterical3:

[twintornados]

Me thinks there could be a civilian version in the wings...."Ultra Duty" uplevel from "Super Duty".... :hysterical2:

[97svtgoin05gt]

Hopefully it doesn't bomb

[Moosetang]

Hmm...an Army vehicle from a British company. At least this time it could be sending out clouds of smoke on purpose... :hysterical3:

BAE Systems is not British, it's just owned by the British. It used to be called United Defense. Their HQ is in Virginia.

[Versa-Tech]

This is what happens when you try to apply conventional wisdom to an exotic design directive. I'm sorry, but that monstrocity doesn't have a prayer.

[Kris Kolman]

This is what happens when you try to apply conventional wisdom to an exotic design directive. I'm sorry, but that monstrocity doesn't have a prayer.

 

And why would that be? Army, Marines, and Congress have worked out their issues and the HUMVEE recap has been cancelled in favor of JLTV. JLTV is comming... Each of the competitors have 12 months to provide 20 test units, and government will spend 15 months beating them up to determine the best option. BAE is as likely as any other 5 to win the contract. As was said the core of BAE's Land Combat division comes from their Vickers (Challenger tank) and United Defence (Bradley fighting vehicle) aquisitions. They have the experience to win this, and astectics have littel to do with it...

[7Mary3]

The good thing for Ford is they are not directly involved. If BAE wins, great, Ford sells some engines.

[2b2]

Me thinks there could be a civilian version in the wings...."Ultra Duty" uplevel from "Super Duty".... :hysterical2:

aaargh "Ultra Duty" is ALL WRONG!!!...

 

...Obviously it should be SuperDuperDuty :D

 

 

except,

look at the grille, definitely a split-wing so that's

THE NEW LINCOLN ANNIHILATOR

[Versa-Tech]

 

 

And why would that be? Army, Marines, and Congress have worked out their issues and the HUMVEE recap has been cancelled in favor of JLTV. JLTV is comming... Each of the competitors have 12 months to provide 20 test units, and government will spend 15 months beating them up to determine the best option. BAE is as likely as any other 5 to win the contract. As was said the core of BAE's Land Combat division comes from their Vickers (Challenger tank) and United Defence (Bradley fighting vehicle) aquisitions. They have the experience to win this, and astectics have littel to do with it...

I could care less how it looks. It's simply too boxy to deflect shaped charges efficiently. It has inflatable tires for christ sake. I seriously question whether this contract is even legitimate.

[Hugh]

Just my opinion: The shape looks like a strong bottom to deflect shock from the ground up and it looks like add-on armour hooks for the sides. This will add more weight but remember this is a 'light' vehicle and they have larger, heavier vehicles in the system. Canadian LAV-III (GM/MOWAG) system and our G-Wagen light vehicles have hook-ons and self-inflating tires standard. I don't know many guys want to change a tire in a firefight and in an IED incident, tires are the first to go so that's moot. Protection from IED is important but remember: Most IED are from ordnance that can kill Main Battle Tanks. Again this is a light vehicle. I wouldn't be surprised if complaints from potential buyers is the powerplant. I can hear complaints that it's not a CAT or CUMMINS.

[jpd80]

I could care less how it looks. It's simply too boxy to deflect shaped charges efficiently. It has inflatable tires for christ sake. I seriously question whether this contract is even legitimate.

You'll never effectively build a vehicle of this type that can withstand a HEAT Kinetic Weapons but small hand held anti Tanks and IEDs are another thing.

Also HUMVEES have a CTIS, Central Tire Inflation System...

 

Makes me wonder whether your criticism is in abeyance of the specs on existing vehicles.. :shrug:

Edited May 6, 2012 by jpd80

[silvrsvt]

I could care less how it looks. It's simply too boxy to deflect shaped charges efficiently. It has inflatable tires for christ sake. I seriously question whether this contract is even legitimate.

 

Shaped Charges don't care what they hit...angled armor doesn't protect against them, since the jet they create burns a hole the size of a dime on what ever they hit..nor are Shaped Charges the primary threat for this vehicle.

 

The tires are "run flats" which means they have an aluminium insert that is roughly half the diameter of the tire, so when the tire goes flat, they can ride on the tire till it fails then the metal rim will carry you the rest of the way...

[silvrsvt]

Also HUMVEES have a CTIS, Central Tire Inflation System...

 

All a CTIS system does is allow the crew to select the tire pressure from inside without deflating or inflating the tires manually.

[jpd80]

All a CTIS system does is allow the crew to select the tire pressure from inside without deflating or inflating the tires manually.

My point is that Versa-tech was criticizing this vehicle for having inflatable tires...when HUMVEEs clearly have inflatable tires too..

 

Modern armor is reactionary and sends out charges to defeat kinetic weapons by deforming the penetrating jet.....

[Edstock]

aaargh "Ultra Duty" is ALL WRONG!!!...

 

...Obviously it should be SuperDuperDuty :D

 

 

except,

look at the grille, definitely a split-wing so that's

THE NEW LINCOLN ANNIHILATOR

 

EXCELLENT! Lincoln can do a brand tie-up with BROWNING, for the Ma Deuce Centennial .50 BMG turret edition, plus a nice Pigeon-Grade Lincoln Navigator, with a Circassian walnut gun-rack for the pigeon-grade Browning shotguns and BAR's.

 

Here's a close-up of a Pigeon-Grade Browning. Max probably knows all about 'em. Lots and lots of money.

 

 

The Middle East will buy every one Lincoln can build, whatever they cost.

[SoonerLS]

BAE Systems is not British, it's just owned by the British. It used to be called United Defense. Their HQ is in Virginia.

You do realize that jokes don't have to be 100% factually accurate, right?

Edited May 6, 2012 by SoonerLS

[Versa-Tech]

 

 

Shaped Charges don't care what they hit...angled armor doesn't protect against them, since the jet they create burns a hole the size of a dime on what ever they hit..nor are Shaped Charges the primary threat for this vehicle.

 

The tires are "run flats" which means they have an aluminium insert that is roughly half the diameter of the tire, so when the tire goes flat, they can ride on the tire till it fails then the metal rim will carry you the rest of the way...

Incorrect sir, any type of force can be deflected, even a highly focused jet. Furthermore, there are ways of using offset panel matrices to percolate pressure waves around a body. This concept is well illustrated in modern muzzle brakes. Obviously, the type of system you would use on a vehicle is far more advanced.

 

As far as the tires go, any large air cavity is a serious liability. Tires are great for civilian use, but have run their course as far as combat vehicles go.

 

I can understand your complacency, their hasn't been much innovation in vehicles over the past 50 years. I'm not complaining though, lazy engineers have provided people like me opportunities beyond measure.

Edited May 6, 2012 by Versa-Tech

[jpd80]

Incorrect sir, any type of force can be deflected, even a highly focused jet. Furthermore, there are ways of using offset panel matrices to percolate pressure waves around a body. This concept is well illustrated in modern muzzle brakes. Obviously, the type of system you would use on a vehicle is far more advanced.

 

As far as the tires go, any large air cavity is a serious liability. Tires are great for civilian use, but have run their course as far as combat vehicles go.

 

I can understand your complacency, their hasn't been much innovation in vehicles over the past 50 years. I'm not complaining though, lazy engineers have provided people like me opportunities beyond measure.

Shame we can't get reactionary armor to prevent idiots crashing into our civillian road cars..

[mercury]

Incorrect sir, any type of force can be deflected, even a highly focused jet. Furthermore, there are ways of using offset panel matrices to percolate pressure waves around a body. This concept is well illustrated in modern muzzle brakes. Obviously, the type of system you would use on a vehicle is far more advanced.

 

As far as the tires go, any large air cavity is a serious liability. Tires are great for civilian use, but have run their course as far as combat vehicles go.

 

I can understand your complacency, their hasn't been much innovation in vehicles over the past 50 years. I'm not complaining though, lazy engineers have provided people like me opportunities beyond measure.

 

The JLTV replaces the Hummer which replaced the Jeep,even at that size it only seats 4.There are limits an size and weight as to how much armor can be on the Army's "grocery getter".

From the first link: "There will be two armor configurations: the basic protection package as well as an add-on kit."

 

What besides tires do you suggest? These vehicles are to cruise down city streets as well as cross country.

 

No innovation? How many more casualties would there be if troops where still driving old Jeeps?

[Kris Kolman]

Versa-Tech I don't get your comments... First off you understand this sin't a main battle tank right? You understand the need to a mixed force of which have some vehicles with far less capable armor than others right?

 

As for Non-legit contract... The vast majority of issues with the HUMVEE in Iraq were IEDs exploding from underneath the vehicle and the weight of add on armor on the outside. The first issue was not easily fixed resulting in the Recap initiative, which involved primarily uprating the undersized to deflect energy away from the passenger compartment (V-Hull, etc). The soldiers in the field initially addressed the add on armor with typical "farm engineering" by bolting/welding whatever they could find at first... Army eventually got around to finding engineered solutions, but the result was a major increase in weight. This weight serverily decreased the payload capacity and put a tremendous wear and tear on the platform. And as a result HUMVEEs have worn out and need to be replaced... JLTV is intended to replace those now worn out HUMVEEs. Your skepticism aside this the congressional directive and the HUMVEE Recap has been cancelled... It is now the only path forward.

 

As for Too boxy, wheels don't work... Apparently you don't understant that the vehicles that have replaced the HUMVEEs in the field have wheels. Tracked vehicles have been going away in Light and Medium duty applications world wide. MRAP and MMPV set of vehicles Army and Marines currently use instead of the HUMVEE in tactical areas are wheeled. And so is the larger Striker... Also one wouldn't call these vehicles unboxy, but more importantly are not light duty vehicles. JLTV is intended to give the Army and Marines a light duty vehicle to rebalance the vehicle mix. The MRAP and MMPV vehicles are almost 3x the cost of the JLTV, get far worst fuel economy, and too large for some jobs (rolling down a city street on patrol).

Edited May 6, 2012 by Kris Kolman

[Versa-Tech]

 

 

The JLTV replaces the Hummer which replaced the Jeep,even at that size it only seats 4.There are limits an size and weight as to how much armor can be on the Army's "grocery getter".

From the first link: "There will be two armor configurations: the basic protection package as well as an add-on kit."

 

What besides tires do you suggest? These vehicles are to cruise down city streets as well as cross country.

 

No innovation? How many more casualties would there be if troops where still driving old Jeeps?

It's not so much the tire as it is the air used to dampen it; hence the "inflatable" distinction. There are wheels for instance in use (in select units) that use an integral foam core, with a friction reactive gel that is sandwiched between the core and tire. If a projectile were to penetrate the sidewall of the tire, the gel around the penetration path would instantly congeal; effectively sealing the liner. The foam would arrest the projectile, while doubling as a weight bearing fail safe similiar to the steel run-flats in function, but far lighter as well as more compliant.

 

Sound expensive? Not really. The system was designed to be used with existing tires and the foam is dirt cheap. The gel is reusable and is easily displaced (err... flushed) through a standard air valve which also doubles as a backup if supplies of said gel were unavailable, so you could still use air inflation. There are several other options currently in development, most of which are commisioned by foreign and private entities.

 

As far as the jeep comment goes, you're standards for progress are about as low as democrats standards for presidential candidates.

Edited May 7, 2012 by Versa-Tech

[boominup]

It's not so much the tire as it is the air used to dampen it; hence the "inflatable" distinction. There are wheels for instance in use (in select units) that use an integral foam core, with a friction reactive gel that is sandwiched between the core and tire. If a projectile were to penetrate the sidewall of the tire, the gel around the penetration path would instantly congeal; effectively sealing the liner. The foam would arrest the projectile, while doubling as a weight bearing fail safe similiar to the steel run-flats in function, but far lighter as well as more compliant.

 

Sound expensive? Not really. The system was designed to be used with existing tires and the foam is dirt cheap. The gel is reusable and is easily displaced (err... flushed) through a standard air valve which also doubles as a backup if supplies of said gel were unavailable, so you could still use air inflation. There are several other options currently in development, most of which are commisioned by foreign and private entities.

We use foam in some of our construction equipment tires for obvious reasons but they cannot be used at highway speeds because of the heat buildup in them. That is why inflatable tires work at highway speeds. There may be other options out there that I am not aware of. Just remember that this new vehicle will be capable of really high speeds with this new Ford diesel.Just my 2 cents!!

[jpd80]

It's not so much the tire as it is the air used to dampen it; hence the "inflatable" distinction. There are wheels for instance in use (in select units) that use an integral foam core, with a friction reactive gel that is sandwiched between the core and tire. If a projectile were to penetrate the sidewall of the tire, the gel around the penetration path would instantly congeal; effectively sealing the liner. The foam would arrest the projectile, while doubling as a weight bearing fail safe similiar to the steel run-flats in function, but far lighter as well as more compliant.

 

Sound expensive? Not really. The system was designed to be used with existing tires and the foam is dirt cheap. The gel is reusable and is easily displaced (err... flushed) through a standard air valve which also doubles as a backup if supplies of said gel were unavailable, so you could still use air inflation. There are several other options currently in development, most of which are commisioned by foreign and private entities.

So what's to stop these new vehicles from using the system you just described?

[Versa-Tech]

Nothing, other than complacent engineers that write up the bill of materials, and of course know-nothing congressman that would rather enlist anyone with a GED as a bullet sponge, rather than cut military personel (by 60% imho) so we can afford to pay for the protection that the elite soldiers deserve.

 

 

..Hence my frustration