All matters MRAP JLTV (merged thread)

[William F. Owen]

Unless my stats are off, MRAPs don't have any dash speed comparable to Strykers or LAVs, and they certainly cannot traverse anywhere similar terrain. Outside of the COIN scenario we face now, can anyone help me see a wider utility?

They may be perfect for this role, but we cannot afford to stock MPF or gray-bottom amphibs with them...or can we? Do we need to have a COIN MRAP ability staged for introduction around the beginning of phase IV?


At the end of the day, nothing beats patrolling the beat on foot. Commuting to work, call the MRAP taxi I suppose.

I think it depends which MRAP? - just like which APC. Most of conclusions come from looking at ADI's Bushmaster as the first iteration and the IMI Wildcat as the next. Yes, some of the MRAPs currently deployed are not as capable as those I cite, so I guess I should have referred to specific vehicles, but I am very wary of seeming to advertise, so best not!

...but I became impressed with Wildcat when I compared it to Stryker.

Should they be baseline equipment for some Infantry units is the question I am trying to answer. I think the answer may lie on how you view the progression of future conflict. Personally I don't see clear blue water between what some call "Warfighting" and some call "COIN". This is why I think it's worth having the discussion.

As concerns patrolling on foot? This is what I spend the majority of my Infantry though, working on, so I concur 100%.

[William F. Owen]

IMI Wildcat compared to M1126 Stryker

Sorry about the formatting. .pdf spread sheet was too large to upload.

Width 2.5m 2.7m with RPG armour 2.71m, without cage
Length 7.15m 6.98m
Height 2.69m 2.64m

Max Speed 104 kph 96 kph
Road Range 700km 530km

GVW 18,000 kg 17,236 kg
Curb Weight 12,600 kg U/K

Side Armour 14.5mm AP and/or RPG 14.5mm AP and RPG with cage
Under wheel IED STANAG 4569 Level 4 U/K

NBC System Full over-pressure and filtration U/K

Crew and passengers 3 crew 9 passengers 3 crew 9 passengers

Side slope 30% 30%
Gradient 60% 60%
Turning Circle 17.5m 17m
Step 40.6cm 58.4cm
Trench 0.9m 1.9m

[Fuchs]

Wilf, I think you look too much at the last line of defence.
Protection is so much more than passive defence.

Armor is really a last ditch protection, and it's one that can be overcome with technical means. That means better-equipped opponents will crack the shell often.

There are so many things that need to go wrong to be hit in the first place, a protection concept can intervene much earlier (armour is nice as last "oh ####" protection, but it comes at a great price).

To be killed by weapons in war while moving in a vehicle, you need
1. to have foes (or dangerous friends)
2. to not have shattered their resolve to fight you previously
3. to be spotted
4. to be identified as foe
5. to be decided upon/to be communicated as target in time
6. to be aimed at well (not applicable to many mines, of course)
7. to not have some form of effective active defense
8. to be hit
9. finally to lack sufficient passive protection

Well, I'd intervene at 3, 4 & 5.

(3)
Bounding, unpredictable off-road movements plus good camouflage and concealment can prevent this. Imagine log trucks moving as carefully as recce AFVs, using hand-held thermals to search for ambushers before moving through dangerous areas.
(4)
Look at Valkiri MRL; it's a MRL that can be disguised as a standard light truck with tarpaulin. SOF sometimes ride mules, have long beards and AK-lookalikes in AFG.
You don't need to drive in military-style vehicles on a recce or raid mission in Iraq/AFG everytime. There are plenty civilian trucks.
(5)
Limit the failure to prevent (3) to short intervals and (5) might be prevented.

(6) and (8) are mostly a function of distance, speed, size and changes of direction. MRAPs don't look so well in this because they drive predictably on (preferably paved) roads at most likely constant speed.

And most importantly, elect politicians that don't fail miserably at (1).

MRAPs represent a simplistic approach that focuses on (9) only. That works fine (for a while) if you want to wage war like the U.S. does in Iraq.

----

Wildcat/Stryker MMP and nominal ground pressure: factor two difference.
No problem on dry, hard ground or even paved roads.

Wildcat/Stryker behaviour after single AT mine hit:
Wildcat immobilized, Stryker moves on.

----

Peacekeepers in Sierra Leone. No MRAP-friendly terrain. Stryker would fail as well.
http://www.mil.se/int/images/local/w060310_07.jpg

[William F. Owen]

@ Wilf, I think you look too much at the last line of defence.
Protection is so much more than passive defence.

@ Peacekeepers in Sierra Leone. No MRAP-friendly terrain. Stryker would fail as well.
http://www.mil.se/int/images/local/w060310_07.jpg

I reject your assertion. My military thought is bounded by the core functions, so I adhere to,

a. Not being found
b. If found do not be fixed (loss of movement, comms, fires and observation)
c. If fixed do not be Struck (the action that creates harm)
d. If struck do not be exploited. Suffer catastrophic loss from the harm.

I am pretty familiar with this area. Transport by "disguised" civilian vehicles was commonly done in Northern Ireland. (I know at least one platoon was regularly carried in a grain lorry)

None of this helps me, if I need to move 650 men, 500km in one night, and sustain them once they are on task.

Actually the UK has looked at this before with AT-105 The problem with Saxon ( and I know it well) was it was a junk vehicle. - but I am now beginning to think elements of the concept were sound.

A concerns Sierra Leone, when I was there, if you wanted to travel the "upline" roads, you went in MAN 4x4 Commercial trucks. They go all over Sierra Leone. In fact most the world relies on pretty simple 4 x 4 commercial lorries. When I used to drive across the Sahara, I regularly encountered commercial lorries ripping along the "piste" with no problem

[Fuchs]

I reject your assertion. My military thought is bounded by the core functions, so I adhere to,

a. Not being found
Large vehicles can be silent, but are difficult to hide.
b. If found do not be fixed (loss of movement, comms, fires and observation)
I admit I'd opt for 4x4 light truck, but 4x4 is not optimal as the loss of one wheel is a mobility kill. AT mines destroy a wheel easily, although they keep going on with some bullet holes.
c. If fixed do not be Struck (the action that creates harm)
Big size and probably poor agility (hp/ton and high center of gravity) aren't helpful.
d. If struck do not be exploited. Suffer catastrophic loss from the harm.

I am pretty familiar with this area. Transport by "disguised" civilian vehicles was commonly done in Northern Ireland. (I know at least one platoon was regularly carried in a grain lorry)

None of this helps me, if I need to move 650 men, 500km in one night, and sustain them once they are on task.

If you move that far you'll be out of reach of almost all opponents most of the time anyway. That might be different in COIN, but an unpredictable movement at night along secondary roads bypassing traffic nodes even offroad should provide a lot of security even in such an environment. 500km is hardly a routine infantry movement in COIN, after all.

Actually the UK has looked at this before with AT-105 The problem with Saxon ( and I know it well) was it was a junk vehicle. - but I am now beginning to think elements of the concept were sound.

A concerns Sierra Leone, when I was there, if you wanted to travel the "upline" roads, you went in MAN 4x4 Commercial trucks. They go all over Sierra Leone. In fact most the world relies on pretty simple 4 x 4 commercial lorries. When I used to drive across the Sahara, I regularly encountered commercial lorries ripping along the "piste" with no problem
[b]MAN 4x4 gl trucks hit about 14 tons if fully loaded, but five tons of this is payload. So most often such trucks will weigh rather 10-11 tons as most payload densities hit the volume limitation much earlier than the weight limitation.

Wilf; we agree that MRAP has a niche in a mission like Iraq. You thought about the other possible other missions.

I remember that the GTK/Boxer monster is in part such a monster because one of the requirements was a bomblet protection. The implied assertion is that APCs are under threat by artillery.

But there's likely no harassing fire on roads if the force densities would be like assumed in exercises and doctrine. Modern brigades shall cover frontages larger than the frontage of an overstretched WW2 division. The force density is necessarily low.
The result is that the artillery needs much better recce to hit.
The artillery would in fact need to find, identify, prioritize and fire at individual companies due to the dense road network that enables a brigade to disperse its marching columns on different roads.

Lots of artillery systems could still penetrate MRAPs or destroy less protected vehicles that march nearby.

[jcustis]

Wilf, those rules are a good script for reconnaissance operations. I am stealing it for its simplicity and ease of retention.

Back to the subject though. Wildcat posts comparable numbers, but it cannot traverse the same terrain (berne ,gaps etc.) as a 6 or 8-wheeled vehicle. Having said that, Stryker is more complex from a maintenance perspective, but probably among only certain variants.

Wildcat will fit a role as a lightweight APC, but other variants will gain weight from the basic model. Looking at its arrangement, however, it doesn't seem to have fighting characteristics. It looks great for self defense, but Stryker compares differently because it has sensors to allow it to "fight for information", which is a big role within certain formations it finds itself in.

And Wildcat looks too damn high for chrissakes. I know it's a function of mine resistance, but what will have to be done to reduce that signature from a short halt?

The Marine Corps was looking at the LAV (logistics variant type-ish) as a MPC candidate, but that died for good reasons which would have otherwise negatively impacted the LAR community.

The balance to be struck is difficult to achieve, and no matter how fair the selection criteria are supposed to be, one "best value" consideration can leave us with a platform that does'nt fill the best niches. If we have to write new doctrine to account for MPC's the USMC is screwed.

[William F. Owen]

Wilf, those rules are a good script for reconnaissance operations. I am stealing it for its simplicity and ease of retention.

You don't have to steal them. They are the core functions. They are how you defeat and avoid defeat in any environment against any enemy. First written down by Ferdinand Foch in 1903

Back to the subject though. Wildcat posts comparable numbers, but it cannot traverse the same terrain (berne ,gaps etc.) as a 6 or 8-wheeled vehicle. Having said that, Stryker is more complex from a maintenance perspective, but probably among only certain variants.

Agreed. Wildcat is a cheaper, simpler, 80% solution.

Wildcat will fit a role as a lightweight APC, but other variants will gain weight from the basic model. Looking at its arrangement, however, it doesn't seem to have fighting characteristics. It looks great for self defense, but Stryker compares differently because it has sensors to allow it to "fight for information", which is a big role within certain formations it finds itself in.

Agreed. It's just an APC/MRAP.

And Wildcat looks too damn high for chrissakes. I know it's a function of mine resistance, but what will have to be done to reduce that signature from a short halt?

Agreed. According to the figures it is two centimetres higher than the Stryker

The Marine Corps was looking at the LAV (logistics variant type-ish) as a MPC candidate, but that died for good reasons which would have otherwise negatively impacted the LAR community.

The balance to be struck is difficult to achieve, and no matter how fair the selection criteria are supposed to be, one "best value" consideration can leave us with a platform that does'nt fill the best niches. If we have to write new doctrine to account for MPC's the USMC is screwed.

More screwed than with CV-22 and AAAV?

[Distiller]

Boxer is one crazy monster. With protection "ueber alles".

Your 1000 men force: If you can speed across country like that, you seem to be unopposed. Guess then you could as well hire a local bus company.
Coffee on Red Square in the morning anyone?

Another thought: How many bombs can the bad guys plant along a hard to predict route (different from the easy to predict patrol routines in Iraqi towns)? Seems like there'd be more danger from RPGs. And these neither the MRAP nor the APC can withstand without reactive armor.

The running costs: Guess if you use an APC like a road-bound MRAP, your running costs - which are dominantly automotive then - shouldn't be too different.

Of course, if you have a vehicle designed for a narrow usage profile (road-use only), then it will be overall cheaper and better suited for that single task than a vehicle with a wider usage profile. But ok, let's not turn this into MRAP vs APC.

As a vehicle to move troops from one square to another, I think trucks (with aramid mats) are equally suited; plus they provide more cargo space, and better rough-terrain capability.
You could put a mortar into an MRAP, and NETFIRES, and ATGM and MANPADS launcher, and cut down the rear cabin and put an autocannon instead. But you will still remain road/piste-bound, which limits your mobility.
And: All these above jobs a truck can also do. Which is basically what Caesar, Bereg, Pantsir, &c do.

I just don't see much space for the MRAP between trucks and APCs.

Btw, the Wildcat was designed for the MPC competition. One of the more interesting MRAPs is the Rafael Golan. But it's still a riot-control vehicle.


PS: NOTHING is more screwed than V-22 and EFV!

[wm]

Just read a story on MSNBC.com about the IRAM 107mm rocket propelled bomb/flying explosive-packed propane tank. I wonder how well an MRAP, Stryker, or an M113 for that matter would survive getting hit by one of these overhead strike devices. Of course the probability of a direct hit is probably about the same as a direct hit from almost any projectile following a purely ballistic trajectory--maybe even less due to the no-doubt oddly shaped warhead. But if they are fired as an MRL spread (an apparent TTP) perhaps the odds go up.

Of course the bomblets from DPICM rounds could be pretty destructive to an MRAP convoy(do we still use them?). Alternatively, the US once was working on a funny submunition--the SADARM projectile--specifically designed to attack the thin-skinned top of engine compartments of armored fighting vehicles. That might be a pretty significant countermeasure for MRAPs too.

[William F. Owen]

One of the more interesting MRAPs is the Rafael Golan. But it's still a riot-control vehicle.

Cancelled six months ago, due to "commercial" problems, with the US partner company. Since riots do not include folks with RPGs, I can't quite see how an RPG protected vehicle counts as a riot-control vehicle. ...but AT-105 was directly descended from an "internal security vehicle" and Golan was, like all MRAPs was biased more to Security Operations than Combat Operations.