The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - March 18, 2010




New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Modern Air Power: War Over the Middle East
2.Commander: Napoleon at War
3.Close Combat: Watch am Rhein
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 
Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use
How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Dirty Little Secrets Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Mad Max Does Baghdad
James Dunnigan    8/26/2004 12:05:16 AM

Since March, 2003, army mechanics  in Iraq and Kuwait have installed 8,000 armor kits, 2,000 aid conditioners and 4,500 bulletproof windshields in trucks and hummers. The units that do this work are sometimes called ?Mad Max Shops? (after the armored vehicles in the Mel Gibson movie of the same name.) The mechanics also do all sorts of modifications, many of them experimental (some work, some don?t). The Mad Max Shops work at night, as the metal becomes too hot to pick up and handle by day. The preferred material for armoring vehicles is a Swedish steel/nickel/chromium alloy called Hardox 400. It costs $1,200 a (40x120 inch) sheet, but is popular because the 10mm thick steel is really good at stopping bullets and bomb blast fragments. There are also commercial armoring kits, and bullet and blast resistant stick-on material. But the Hardox 400 armor is preferred. This corrosion and wear resistant metal was developed for industrial uses, and not only is tough, but looks and feels tough. The Mad Max shops stay in business because they can do custom work, and basically solve protection problems that armored kits or stick-on materials cannot. This is especially the case with outsize vehicles, like heavy trucks and tank transporters. The Mad Max mechanics can cut  Hardox steel to fit just about anything.

Other equipment mods are made in these shops as well. Some large trucks are fitted with battering rams, the better to plow through roadblocks that attempt to halt a convoy in an ambush. Fence like structruere are sometimes installed, to protect against RPG warheads. There are still several thousand vehicles equipped with BFT (Blue Force Tracker). This system, so useful during the initial invasion of Iraq, continues to save lives by allowing users to instantly know where other BFT equipped vehicles are, and to IM (Instant Message) them. The BFT equipment requires maintenance, and the installation of upgrades. But it is seen as a really useful, and often lifesaving, piece of equipment. When the radios don?t work, BFT usually will (because it uses a satellite phone link). 

August 14, 2004: A U.S. Army Stryker brigade stationed in the north of Iraq, around Mosul, for eight months so far, has proved itself quite capable in combat. The Stryker armored vehicles are controversial, mainly because they are new, and are light armored vehicles that move via wheels, rather than tracks. The Strykers are also catching a lot of criticism for the usual problems a new combat vehicle encounters. The Stryker brigade equipment exchanged a lot of armor protection and heavy weapons for more electronics and communications equipment. The brigade has an initial version of the ?battlefield Internet? that the army is slowly putting together. The action in and around Mosul is not as heavy as it is down around Baghdad. But there are heavily armed Baath party diehards and al Qaeda terrorists up in Mosul. Thus the Stryker brigade has seen a lot of action, some of it quite heavy. It was thought that the Strykers would be very vulnerable to RPGs, but only two vehicles have been lost that way  so far. In some actions, platoons (four vehicles) of Strykers had dozens of RPGs fired at them with no serious damage. The protection on the Strykers has been up to the job, but the troops, and hostile Iraqis, have also noted that the Strykers are faster, and quieter, than armored vehicles. This turns out to be a battlefield advantage, something American troops had forgotten about. The last large scale use of wheeled armored vehicles by American troops was in World War II. Some of the details of how those vehicles could be used had apparently been forgotten. A wheeled armored vehicle can more quickly move out of an ambush, or any other kind of trouble. Wheeled armored vehicles also make a lot less noise. The ?track laying system? is inherently noisy, wheel?s are not. Strykers can sneak up on the bad guys, an M-2 Bradley or M-1 tank cannot.

The troops in the Stryker Brigade are trained to same high standards of all American infantry, which means soldiers capable of operating at high speed. The Stryker brigade has a new communications system that allows for speedier operations. Whether it?s getting out of an ambush, or getting into position for a raid or attack, the extra speed leaves the enemy at a disadvantage. 

 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted

Sentinel    RE:Mad Max Does Baghdad look at Rhodesia   11/7/2004 8:09:01 AM
The Rhodesians were heavily dependent on long lines of supply through ZANU/ZAPU guerrilla country. In fact, one of the ways the enemy tried to economically strangle the government was an aggressive mine warfare program directed at the roads. The Rhodesians were able to overcome this obstacle by first, armoring their trucks. It is amazing to me that the US Army has to spend millions on a truck just to have it armored. The Rhodesians were under strict sanctions and they managed to produce a fleet of armored vehicles in a matter of 3 weeks, using existing vehicles. How long has it taken the US army to get armored humvees to the troops, months, years? Second, they drove more slowly. That is right more slowly; never over 20 mph. Current, US army doctrine has humvees driving at upwards of 70 mph. So if the blast doesn't kill you, the massive accident after the blast will. The Rhodesians learned that if you drove more slowly the driver could recover and maintain control of their vehicles after a close blast. I know driving slower makes you an easier RPG target. But, chain link fence or slat armor are cheap and plentiful. They also filled their tires with water. I don't think this would do anything for IEDs, but it helped absorb the blast from a mine. It goes with out saying that you should change the seats in the humvee. Currently, they are similar in size and shape to a folding metal chair that you might find in a cafeteria. It has no neck support, and no ballistic defense. Also, it has a three point harness like what you would find in your car. I think it is much the same in the heavy transport. What you need is a seat with neck support, a solid harness, mounting with shock absorption, and some additional ballistic protection (defense in depth is good with armor as well). The South Africans came up with some further innovations during their bush war. In addition to the ?V? shaped hull to deflect blasts, they. Put fire suppression systems on their vehicles, simple cheap systems. Why doesn?t the humvee have one? A foam based fire extinguisher that activates when the vehicle rolls, or when the spray port reaches 300 degrees like office fire suppression systems. Most of the tech is off the shelf. None of these enhancements constitute a multi-million dollar program. Maybe that is why the Army doesn?t look into it, not enough pork. I?m afraid many people are dying in Iraq because our military leaders are not adaptable or flexible. It?s a shame. Tim Reed SSG MI Timothy.M.Reed@us.army.mil
 
Quote    Reply

lazlor    RE:Mad Max Does Baghdad look at Rhodesia - SSG REED...   11/7/2004 7:41:46 PM
check out this company. Help might be on the way sooner than you think re: the lousy situation of up-armoring the Hummer. link tell me what you think....
 
Quote    Reply

Sentinel    RE:Mad Max Does Baghdad look at Rhodesia - SSG REED...   12/6/2004 5:30:16 PM
Their vehicles have many of the same design features as the South Africans. Check out the Caspir. link They have the same "v" shaped hulls. Same blast absorbent tire covers, same high rides. I can?t see the inside but I'm sure they have blast absorbent seating, and fire suppression systems. I guess my only criticism is that the design for mine protected vehicles should vary a little from vehicles designed to survive IEDs mainly because the shock wave and shrapnel would be coming from a different direction. Typical mines are planted in the ground and detonate when the vehicle is directly on top of them. Thus the need for the ?v? shaped hull to deflect the blast and fragments. I would also add a turret to these with a 50 cal. I would also consider adding some slat armor like the strikers have. My ideal anti-mine, IED vehicle would have: Good ?v? shaped armor Adjustable suspension to change the height of the ride depending on the threat (either underneath, or from the sides) I would give the vehicle a base level of armor but design it so that additional armor could be quickly mounted so as to be flexible for changing threats. It would have it come out of the factory with mounting brackets for slat armor or ERA. So that if you are operating in an area with a mine threat only you could lose some of the lateral armor, and if you were heading into an area where there was an RPG or lateral IED threat you could quickly add protection. It would have a robust IED jammer. It would have hatches on multiple sides that would open even if the hull was bent. The interior of the vehicle would be compartmentalized so that the fuel is not a threat to the crew. It would have frangible tire and axle systems, shock absorbent seating, good fire suppression systems, and pressure vents. Of course, it would have good visibility using clear ballistic materials. It would have a turret with a 50 cal. (also some firing ports) It would be made out of off the shelf technologies, using easily obtainable and relatively inexpensive tools (as many drive train parts as you can from the standard army 2.5 and 5 ton trucks.) That?s pretty much it?go forth and make millions as a defense contractor. Best regards, SSG Tim Reed
 
Quote    Reply



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2010StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy