Posts
There's some rumors that the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV) will be cancelled.
I had not been paying much attention, so I looked it up.
First there's the eye-watering price. $370 to $399 thousand each.
Then there's the L part.
When your light vehicle is heavier than a fully laden CCKW (deuce and a half for you non geekers) you've lost your way.
The JLTV is 22,500 lb. An empty CCKW is 8,800 lb. and fully loaded is 16,400 lb.
The M925 5-ton truck from when I was in the Army is 22,030 lb. empty.
When your HMMWV replacement is the same weight as a cargo truck, you done fucked up.
The Humvee is less than 6,000 lb. curb weight. They were $30k in 1989 and that'd be $76k today for a basic cargo version.
I think we need to remember what the Humvee was for. It replaced the Mutt, which replaced the Jeep.
They're not for combat at the front. They're for running errands and light transportation.
That role still needs done.
What this program appears to be is a "we tried to use Humvees as combat vehicles and that didn't work out, so let's make a vehicle that can be used like we tried to use the Humvee for."
Which is fine as long as you don't go on to say, "Since this replaces the Humvee in that one, specialized, combat role, let's replace ALL Humvees with this!"
Which they didn't manage to do, but...
Having worked for a company with significant initial design and testing input for what became the JLTV, I’d like to chime in. The up-rated HMMWV with armor and such was impossible to keep running with the overloaded drivetrain and suspension. Iterative upgrades were developed and tested to provide the mobility and safety necessary but still not be a Cougar, M-ATV or MRAP size and weight. For an area with light weapons and insurgency, a JLTV is safer than a HMMWV and not as cumbersome than bigger and even safer vehicles.
ReplyDeleteHOWEVER, as you pointed out, as a general purpose vehicle to replace the “scoot around the base/compound and run errands” that is similar to the HMMWV, the JLTV sucks. GMV 1.1 fills most of the HMMWV role but still not an ideal General Purpose vehicle.
There’s lots of other vehicles that are in the pipeline or fielded that provide mobility, but none that I can remember that fill the “Army pickup truck/SUV” role as well as the HMMWV. Polaris MRZR and DAGOR are too small. The Infantry Squad Vehicle (ISV) based on the Chevy Colorado ZR2 may be closest to a good HMMWV replacement.
Dunno about that others…
Wandering Neurons
When the Humvee replaced the Mutt and CUCV and the totally not a CUCV because it was a Chevy not a Dodge there was no requirement for them to be in front line, main line combat. And no anticipation for the IED and mine warfare we encountered.
DeleteThe uparmored Humvees were a stop-gap to fit a need we didn't know we were going to have.
A special vehicle for the role and a replacement for it are logical.
But trying to take that vehicle designed for that new role and stuff it into the Humvee's designed role is asinine.
It's akin to discovering your truck keeps taking anti-tank fire and uparmoring them didn't work so you make wheeled tanks that CAN take the fire then using them like trucks where there isn't such fire, especially when they're not good at being trucks anymore.
Having worked for AMG for 20 years, can vouch the company has the capacity to design, modify and build pretty much any wheeled vehicle you want. The bad/stupid decision making rests entirely with the pentagon and I could not agree more that distinct specialized trucks/vehicles are needed for specific functions within the military. The up armored HMMWV did as good a job as was possible for a flat bottom truck (you correctly pointed out it was a Jeep replacement for general transport with much higher capacity - almost matching the old deuce and a half) as for blast deflection you need really need V or modified V undersides, and yes, the bit about "Light" seems to have gone lost when you try to build a Swiss Army Knife truck that does everything but not really well enough in every application.
ReplyDeleteI am hoping some sanity filters into the procurement system (not holding my breath) such that the JLTV A2 and HMMWV continue being built (and possibly some new vehicle) but directed and allocated to the proper use within the forces. I loved making demos to foreign nations, the generals and other bigwigs would arrive smug that the HMMWV was "antiquated" and left slack jawed when we demonstrated capability on 40 degree hillside or meter wide trenches, running circles around their little Turkish, German, French or Chinese military trucks. Fun times.
DoD procurement is to actual needs as fish are to bicycles.
ReplyDeleteEven the Corps went hard core stupid in artillery for 40 years.
We took Army discard M198s, which were too heavy to lift with anything but a CH-53E on a cold day, when what they should have done was tow M101s with Humvees, and up the battery to 8 guns instead of 6, which they could have moved with anything, including Hueys or two beefy Marines.
They finally shaved tons off the M198 with the M777, which is still more weight and less mobility than you need for helo or amphibious insertions.
But using WWII artillery tech and existing 1980s Humvees is cheap, whereas buying giant guns you don't need brings bux to congressional districts and dotmil contractors.
QED