Report: Israel to Supply Armored Vehicles to U.S. Marines in Iraq

[sgmgrumpy]

http://www.thememriblog.org/blog_personal/en/767.htm

U.S. Marines in Iraq with specially equipped armored “Golan” vehicles which are specifically suited for urban warfare and can sustain attacks by RPGs and road mines.

Source: Al Sharq Al-Awsat, London, February 28, 2007

[Stan]

Looks like it can handle the job and a nice interior to boot !

http://www.defense-update.com/products/g/golan.htm

The vehicle uses an armored monocoque structure. The integrity of this structure provides the strength to absorb the deformations generated by mines and IED blasts. The V shaped hull has a "floating floor" panel to mitigate the blast effects of mines. It thereby provides an optimal solution to protect the crew and vehicle against the identified threats. The vehicle has an effective armor suite to defeat small arms and RPG threats, medium size IED's, 7 kg mines under belly and 14 kg under wheels. The spall liner was eliminated, assuming the efficiency of external armor to prevent hull penetration by most threats.

[sullygoarmy]

I just hope they take the Star of David off the side before they give it to the marines! Could be a rolling TRP!

On a serious note, hopefully these vehicles have the mine protection to provide better security to our soldiers. I think we have a vast pool of knowledge gained by our Israeli allies and their constant fight with insurgents in desert terrain. We need to tap not only into their specialized equipment, but their TTPs, and lessons learned from recent fighting in Lebanon.

[tequila]

All part of a much larger order for MRAPs that the Corps is putting through with a possible eye towards replacing hummvees in Iraq.

[Tom Odom]

I just hope they take the Star of David off the side before they give it to the marines! Could be a rolling TRP!

On a serious note, hopefully these vehicles have the mine protection to provide better security to our soldiers. I think we have a vast pool of knowledge gained by our Israeli allies and their constant fight with insurgents in desert terrain. We need to tap not only into their specialized equipment, but their TTPs, and lessons learned from recent fighting in Lebanon.

While I agree that the IDF has developed much in equipment, much of it has been done on a US dime. After 4 years in war--longer than WWII--it boggles the mind that we are just now developing vehicles that reflect current operational needs.

As for learing from Israeli allies on how to fight insurgents, that implies our interests are in parallel and that they actually conduct COIN operations. Neither is the case.

best

Tom

[Danny]

Tom said: " ... it boggles the mind that we are just now developing vehicles that reflect current operational needs."

Boy do I agree with that sentiment.

The inertia at the DoD is maddening, and there is absolutely no excuse - none - for still having to "up-armor" HMMWVs this far into OIF2. On the other hand, there is a reluctance to properly fund the armed forces, both in the administration and congress. And ... there is the general ignorance among the American public as to what it really takes to go to war.

Ask yourself why it has taken this long for the Marines to deploy the MTV, and why the Interceptor is STILL being deployed to the army, without the side SAPI protection that the MTV has? At some point this points to recalcitrance of the country as to its moral obligation to equipment its men in uniform.

[Smitten Eagle]

Tom said: " ... it boggles the mind that we are just now developing vehicles that reflect current operational needs."

The inertia at the DoD is maddening, and there is absolutely no excuse - none - for still having to "up-armor" HMMWVs this far into OIF2. On the other hand, there is a reluctance to properly fund the armed forces, both in the administration and congress. And ... there is the general ignorance among the American public as to what it really takes to go to war.

Ask yourself why it has taken this long for the Marines to deploy the MTV, and why the Interceptor is STILL being deployed to the army, without the side SAPI protection that the MTV has? At some point this points to recalcitrance of the country as to its moral obligation to equipment its men in uniform.

It seems to me that there are specific lobbies involved in producing certain pieces of equipment, namely the Army's FCS and for the Marines, the EFV. Both programs are for building ground combat vehicles designed to fight a specific kind of enemy: Nation-State army that plays by the rules of 3GW.

I had a conversation with a Marine colonel some time ago: He expressed to me how distrought he was due to the fact that we're fighting a war now that doesn't fit into the "Expeditionary operations mindset." How sad that the current war isn't good enough.

Are we developing doctrine and building the equipment to support the doctrine? Or are we developing equipment and building the doctrine to support the equipment?

*ends screed against acquisitions industry*

[Uboat509]

Ask yourself why it has taken this long for the Marines to deploy the MTV, and why the Interceptor is STILL being deployed to the army, without the side SAPI protection that the MTV has? At some point this points to recalcitrance of the country as to its moral obligation to equipment its men in uniform.

I don't wear the interceptor but I did get issued the side protection plates for the body armor that I do wear along with the most ridiculous shoulder pads I could have imagined. Quite frankly I have no intention of tearing my kit apart to add more weight and width to it for a little bit of protection. For the first twelve years of my career you only wore body armor if you were doing a live fire with explosives and then it was RBA and no one complained. Now we must look like medieval knights before we leave the wire. Don't get me wrong, I am not against body armor but we keep adding to it under the auspices that protection is more important than mobility. At some point it becomes counterproductive. The big joke in my unit now is that the next step is to have every soldier wrapped in re-bar and dipped in concrete.

SFC W

[120mm]

Tom - Agreed on the conducting COIN operations comment.

Danny - I agree on the inertia in DoD, but there is a part of me that responds with "protective equipment never won a war."

We cannot up-armor our way to victory. There is a purpose for bodyarmor and armored patrol vehicles (even armored resupply vehicles, but try to tell the DoD that) but soldiers conducting offensive operations in body armor are at a disadvantage from the moment they LD. But it takes commanders willing to take risks and creativity to minimize those risks to do that, and those two attributes appear to be in short supply in this fight.