New Humvee: I dig it! [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : New Humvee: I dig it!


NeverMore1701
10-24-2012, 07:58
http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2012/10/23/high-performance-humvee-built-for-us-special-ops/?test=latestnews

http://global.fncstatic.com/static/managed/img/Leisure/2009/gmv660.jpg

Bren
10-24-2012, 08:03
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. :upeyes:

I'm betting special forces show a preference for worn out 1151's over that.

John Rambo
10-24-2012, 08:10
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. :upeyes:

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.

NeverMore1701
10-24-2012, 08:10
I don't give a rat's about military applications, I want one for me!

Biscuitsjam
10-24-2012, 08:15
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.

arclight610
10-24-2012, 08:31
http://www.bikeforest.com/rhoades_car.jpg

I prefer even lighter for my SF operations

Phaze5ive
10-24-2012, 08:35
Spec ops need only horses and bayonets.

Dennis in MA
10-24-2012, 08:36
http://www.bikeforest.com/rhoades_car.jpg

I prefer even lighter for my SF operations

I was in SF once. I saw two guys (I think they were guys) riding one. Was that you? :rofl:


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?

ray9898
10-24-2012, 08:40
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.

michael_b
10-24-2012, 08:42
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. :upeyes:

I'm betting special forces show a preference for worn out 1151's over that.

The article states there's different up armored packages available for multi configurations depending on need.




-On mobile

Dennis in MA
10-24-2012, 09:02
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.

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?

sappy13
10-24-2012, 10:20
that would be a fun daily driver.

SevenSixtyTwo
10-24-2012, 17:24
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.

lvl1trauma
10-25-2012, 06:07
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.

KalashniKEV
10-25-2012, 07:34
Its like a Jeep on steroids.

Like this?

http://i145.photobucket.com/albums/r220/Kalashnikev/2012-10-24_14-23-30_12.jpg

I get that. War is different than it was 30 years ago. . . I think.

It is.

Were people trying to blow our 2.5's and Jeeps in WW2?

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.


Are the bombs getting worse because our armor is getting stronger?

Yes.

Are injuries actually on the rise BECAUSE of the armor?

No.

On the surface, these may seem like stupid questions.

Yes.

The damn thing doesn't even have a bumper!

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...

Batesmotel
10-25-2012, 12:08
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.

M&P15T
10-25-2012, 12:18
http://i145.photobucket.com/albums/r220/Kalashnikev/2012-10-24_14-23-30_12.jpg
Oh.

My.

Gawd.

http://soshable.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/shut-up-and-take-my-money.jpg

vart
10-25-2012, 12:24
Eh...

If I win the lottery, this will be parked in one of my garages...

http://www.defense-update.com/images_new2/oshkosh_matv.jpg

http://www.defense-update.com/newscast/0609/news/matv_300609.html

KalashniKEV
10-25-2012, 12:36
Oh.

My.

Gawd.


I took that pic yesterday at AUSA.

You should have seen some of the "NO PHOTOGRAPHY" stuff they had out there...

el_jewapo
10-25-2012, 14:01
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?

fnfalman
10-25-2012, 14:29
Armor and mobility don't go together. You can either have agility and speed or you can have protection.

Jeeps and Humvees were never meant to be fighting vehicles.

fnfalman
10-25-2012, 14:31
I took that pic yesterday at AUSA.

You should have seen some of the "NO PHOTOGRAPHY" stuff they had out there...

Who needs photography when they can send in spies with great memories and using footwork to measure dimensions for possible performance envelopes.

KalashniKEV
10-25-2012, 14:58
Who needs photography when they can send in spies with great memories and using footwork to measure dimensions for possible performance envelopes.

Because "performance envelopes" are not measured in "paces."

You're out of your lane...again.

If Popular Science had not circulated photos of the "Beast of Kandahar" a few years ago, China would not have been able to construct a scale model RQ-170 to swap with the one the Iranians brought down in DEC 11.

Also sneaking spies into an arms expo is tough stuff and comes at great risk- it's much easier to wait for some doofus to post some pics online.

Industrial espionage works the same way...

Oh, look... it's Radom's ACR clone...

http://i145.photobucket.com/albums/r220/Kalashnikev/Rifles/2012-10-22_15-16-13_252.jpg