All matters MRAP JLTV (merged thread)

[SWJ Blog]

The Impact of Incorporating MRAPs into BCT’s

Entry Excerpt:

The Impact of Incorporating MRAPs into BCTs
by Joe Parker

Download the Full Article: The Impact of Incorporating MRAPs into BCT’s

The Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicle had a highly publicized entry into the military ranks of vehicles, first with the Marines in 2004, and then eventually filling requirements with the Army to provide a dramatic increase in IED and blast protection than the ill-suited HMMVW for combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Rushed in to production by as many as nine separate contractors , the endstate resulted in an accelerated production of multiple variations of the MRAP, with the types roughly categorized as Category I, II, and III and based on number of occupants and mission specific mine/IED clearance operations Now, as the combat mission in Iraq has completed and leaders begin to discuss life beyond Afghanistan, the MRAPs usefulness is in question. The Department of Defense is actively pursuing a replacement for the HMMVW with the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle program , and the MRAP is facing an identity crisis. Is it a troop transporter or a combat system? What capability beyond the blast protection does it bring and how does that translate into future utilization? It would appear that the MRAP does have a future beyond our current conflicts as Defense Secretary Robert Gates instructed the military to incorporate it into the Army Brigade Combat Team Modernization (BCTMOD) plan. What is yet to be seen is how well the MRAP incorporates itself into the BCTMOD plan, what role and capability it fills in the Brigade Combat Team, and what additional requirements it places on existing force structure.

Download the Full Article: The Impact of Incorporating MRAPs into BCT’s

MAJ Joe Parker is currently a student at the Command and General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. He has served three years in Iraq as a platoon leader, brigade maintenance officer, and company commander. He holds a BA in Communications from Wake Forest University, and is a graduate of the Quartermaster Officer Basic Course and the Combined Logistics Captains Career Course. The views expressed in this paper are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government.



--------
Read the full post and make any comments at the SWJ Blog.
This forum is a feed only and is closed to user comments.

[Tukhachevskii]

...thread but someone closed it I'll post it here anyway (it won't quite sound/feel right but what the what).

Now, regardless of what you may all think about the “great” Mike Sparks/Sparky, I always found his concept of “battle-boxes” quite intriguing (nay, sensible?). Looks like someone else has too! Specifically KMW’s Heavily-protected personnel transport. I actually prefer the idea of these than the MRAP fetish now gripping the world’s militaries. I can’t see why an entire battalion couldn’t mount up in these on heavy trucks the logistics chaps would have anyway and be transported into their AO or a friendly rear (). Once there the Battalion would mount up in an APC Squadron/Regiment for movement over the line of departure. Given any army worth its salt would already have heavy 8x8 trucks in its transportation/distribution companies the only real costs would be the actual containers themselves. Furthermore, although I can’t fathom it from the limited literature available currently, Bn’s could be administratively moved by train without needing to debuss from the containers given they seem to be of standard ISO size and could simply be mounted on rail cars. At the rear area RV the containers (plus troops) would simply be lifted onto waiting trucks and “shipped” to their respective formation rear areas where (separate) APC battalions would be waiting for actual combat (did I repeat myself?! I can’t wait to tell my ex ).

[davidbfpo]

Thread re-opened, it must be Spring.