300 IEDs, 0 Deaths
New vehicles protect Marines
By Tom Vanden Brook
USA TODAY
In more than 300 attacks since last year, no Marines have died while riding in new fortified armored vehicles the Pentagon hopes to rush to Iraq in greater numbers this year, a top Marine commander in Anbar province said.
Brig. Gen. John Allen, deputy commander of coalition forces in Anbar province, said the Marines have tracked attacks on the vehicles since January 2006. The vehicles’ raised, V-shaped hulls deflect the force of blasts from homemade bombs buried in roadways.
There’s been an average of less than one injured Marine per attack on the vehicles, Allen said. There have been 1,100 attacks on coalition vehicles during the period in Anbar province, the heart of the Sunni Muslim insurgency.
Attacks on other vehicles caused more than two casualties per attack, including deaths, Allen said.
The Marines provided statistics for injuries involving the new vehicles, but they did not release the number of deaths involving Humvees. The Marines do not release causes of death because they do not want to give the enemy combat intelligence.
Pentagon casualty records show that of the 60 combat deaths this month in Iraq, 35 troops have been killed by homemade bombs, which the Pentagon calls improvised explosive devices (IEDs). None was a Marine. At least 16 of the dead were riding in Humvees, according to records and published reports.
IEDs are responsible for 70% of U.S. casualties in Iraq, Pentagon records show.
The Marines operate about 100 of the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles and want an additional 3,000 MRAPs in Anbar province. Marine Corps Commandant James Conway told the Joint Chiefs of Staff last month that he wants to require every Marine traveling outside bases to ride in the MRAPs.
“It’s a great vehicle in term of protecting troops,” Allen said.
Congress wants more money to buy the vehicles this year. The Senate version of the emergency Pentagon spending bill being debated by Congress would include $4 billion to buy the vehicles.
The vehicles “can and will save lives,” says Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., who pushed an amendment for an additional $1.5 billion for the vehicles through the Senate last month. The new vehicles “are a dramatic improvement in the odds of survival” for U.S. troops, he said.
The Pentagon needs more than $8 billion this year and next to pay for about 7,700 vehicles. In January, it issued contracts with nine companies to develop and build the vehicles.
The vehicles’ safety is enhanced, Allen said, by raising their hulls a few feet off the ground where the force of a buried bomb is concentrated. Humvees, by contrast, have a lower center of gravity and are thinly protected on the bottom.
The Army, which has most of the 145,000 U.S. troops in Iraq, will have about 1,800 of the vehicles in Iraq by December. It has other armored vehicles, such as tanks, and intends to continue to operate armored Humvees because they are more mobile than MRAPs.
Be respectful of others and their opinions. Inflammatory remarks and inane leftist drivel will be deleted. It ain’t about free speech, remember you’re in a private domain. My website, my prerogative.
If you can't handle using your real email address, don't bother posting a comment.
freegin sweet!! Adapt and overcome.That’s what seperates us from the pussy Frenchys and the rest of the Euro-weenies.
April 19th, 2007 at 5:10 amTo quote a certain character from the film Robocop…
“IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII LIKE IT!”
[Vehicle barred from use on the Garden State Parkway. May cause irreparable damage to kidneys and liver. Void where prohibited.]
April 19th, 2007 at 5:17 amSurprised a dem increased funding last year! But there is an explanation perhaps for the recentt love fest of the dems after meeting with Bush yesterday…
I suspect Bush is holding a card like this vehicle. It would not look good for the dems if production of this bad-boy was interrupted by the pelosi pussies.
April 19th, 2007 at 5:24 amcant wait to train on that bad mofo. add myself another license .
April 19th, 2007 at 5:40 amWhy are we in ‘need’ of funding for this?
John Murtha and company can’t vote to fund this, it would prove to be an advantage in Iraq, They need dead soldiers to stand on.
bty -
I bet the goracle will want to have the Pentagon buy carbon offsets for this vehicle. How long before the Governtator wants one? He could then campaign in Compton.
April 19th, 2007 at 5:41 amYet another fine product brought to you by the good people at Israeli Military Industries!
April 19th, 2007 at 5:53 amI want one!!! Sweet!
April 19th, 2007 at 5:57 amTHAT THING IS BAD ASS!!!
it’s only a matter of time before your gonna see ‘em jam packed with and in the carpool lane.
April 19th, 2007 at 6:16 amGreetings:
So…why am I, just another American, seeing this for the first time…here?
300 attacks and NO marines killed? Where have I read that, except…here?
This should be on a billboard in EVERY major city in America.
Do you see why I keep a heavy chain upon my anger?
Where’s the truth, people? Why isn’t it being shouted from the rooftops?
Let’s all make an email of this picture and send it to everyone we know. NOW! MOVE IT MOVE IT MOVE IT!
Pat, is there proof so we can send that?
Let’s roll, people!
Tim Roesch
April 19th, 2007 at 6:18 amCommand Private Major
I saw this on futureweopons, this is a kickass piece of machinery. Production should be expedited no matter what the cost.
April 19th, 2007 at 6:30 am2nd the why is this the first time… Isreali Military Industries? Really or is it a joke.
April 19th, 2007 at 6:33 amOn the Europussies…the Germans are still using the VW thing (Rommel in the Desert version , with slight upgrades) and the Brits are using a landrover that looks like it is from the 1970’s… The new ones are much nicer.
Anyway, another great article Pat. Hopw that our Men adn Women can get as many as they need and that the F**ks in Congress don’t try to skip on the AC and bullet proofing to save a buck or two.
I bet this really pisses off the dems–something to stop the body count. Holy shit! What will they do now?
April 19th, 2007 at 6:38 amLet me get this straight. 8 Billion Dollars to order 7700 of these vehicles. Each vehicle is over $1 million dollars a piece. Am I off base by saying? Fuck! Those are expensive!
April 19th, 2007 at 6:46 amnot if your son is in one
April 19th, 2007 at 6:50 amShit…. not if I’M in it… haha
April 19th, 2007 at 7:27 amActually John, the Germans have been rocking G-Wagons for a few years. And before that they used Hummers that we sold them.
Most of our friends and “friends” in Europe are pretty well equipped. Whether or not they use the equipment is another matter entirely; but, “ya know”.
April 19th, 2007 at 7:45 amYup, it really is Israeli. The South Africans make some fine land-mine-defeating APCs as well (and I think the Marines use some of them, too? Called a Buffalo?)
April 19th, 2007 at 8:23 amOur “friends” in Europe have some great equipment, because they need more places to hide. They are in dire straights in their home countries because too many of them are unwilling to expose themselves, their police or miltary to any “unnecessary” dangers at any time or place. We have some field commanders of various units that have shown to be extremely outstanding in doing what needs to be done, and leading their men and women in doing so, but too many want to hide behind 5 inches of reinforced armor plating and whine that the US needs to stop upsetting the Muslims. They would rather feel safe an unsuspecting when their daughters get raped, and their throast ar slit by some discontent raghead who uses the line of Jihad, when all they really are are malcontents that know they will get away with the terror.
April 19th, 2007 at 8:25 amIs this the new Canyonero? Twelve yards long two lanes wide, sixty five tons of American pride! This is fucking awesome. Tim makes a good point; why hasn’t this got our more, and mentioning the drop in casualties? I am going to send this out to a few people.
Here is another one I found recently, but don’t know anything about it being in use.
http://www.blackwaterusa.com/armored/
April 19th, 2007 at 8:29 amWhat we need in Iraq;
1) HK 416
http://www.hkpro.com/hk416.htm
2) Dragonskin body Armor
http://www.military.com/soldiertech/0,14632,Soldiertech_060420_dragon3,,00.html
3) Vehicles like the one in this article
April 19th, 2007 at 8:40 amhere is alink to a whole bunch of proposed MRAP’s, i think the marines are getting the oshkosh one and the army I know has the cougar right now.
http://www.marcorsyscom.usmc.mil/sites/story/fullstory.asp
April 19th, 2007 at 8:47 amthe grizzly apc looks a little low to the ground, and might not do too well on rough terrain. definatley better than a humvee though. Cougars are coming to be the vehicle of choice.
April 19th, 2007 at 8:52 amnice find D-Mac
April 19th, 2007 at 8:57 amhow do the MRAPs fare against shape charges?
April 19th, 2007 at 9:57 amthey may deflect most ieds, but if Iran keeps pumping in weapons, you can ride around in an Abrams and it still won’t do much good if insurgents are running around with shapes.
Nice! Volvo, eat your heart out!
April 19th, 2007 at 10:11 amThe vehichles that have seem to have the jump on things and have been field tested (as in IED Tested) are the ones by Forrce Protection out of North Carolina. The background in the company is retired armour men and they took much of their inspiration from the South African military who fought a long running insurgency against the ANC. Their concept was that the South African Militry could not endure majormajor losses, both of men and equipment. The idea was to have a vehicle that could take a hit and deflect the explosion away from occupants and reinforce key areas of the drivetrain so the vehicle could have higher survivability. In addition, it was designed, again, a force fighting with a limited budget, to be easily repaired and put back in service should it be disabled in an attack. The vhehicles they have now incountry (Afghanistan too)are the Cougar and the Buffalo.
for a better description, goto their website:
April 19th, 2007 at 10:24 amhttp://www.forceprotection.net/ You will find them to be real badass vehicles. I do not know if my info is still current, but as of several month ago, these vehicles were touted to have endured 100’s of attacks without any fatalities to the crews inside. And the injuries incurred were relatively minor to nonexistant. One vehicle had it whell blown off and still took the crew better than two miles to safety. And like the desighn standards advanced by the South African Military, our guys have incorporated all the above crteria and then some and made an even better vehicle. The black and white comparison was illustrated in an article in SOF about a year and a half ago. It pictured a Humvee that was completely destroyed, emaphasis on the crew compartment. The picture below was that of a Cougar with the front axle blown off and some cowling damage. The Cougar’s crew compartment was intact. The crew made it through fine and the vehicle was recovered and put bak into service shortly thereafter. The difference for the two was like that of day or night, and for our Marines and Soldiers, that of life or death. They have a lighter scout version called the Cheetah coming out soon too. Call your reps and demand that this be a part of future defense appropriations.
oooOOO. The HK 416. I’m mildly aroused.
April 19th, 2007 at 10:33 amIn the words of Bruce Wayne/Batman (Begins):
“Does it come in black?”
April 19th, 2007 at 10:34 am“how do the MRAPs fare against shape charges?
they may deflect most ieds, but if Iran keeps pumping in weapons, you can ride around in an Abrams and it still won’t do much good if insurgents are running around with shapes.”
You only get that effect if a shape charge can come into direct contact with a vehicle’s hull, which an IED obviously can not do. So, while it does have an increased force in a localized area, armored vehicles are still resistant. As to the Abrams, even a shape charge has a hard time penetrating its armor.
Really, these are the things (body armor, mine-resistant vehicles) that we should have gone into Iraq with. With that type of protection, an ignorant jihadist hick might have believed that US forces were unbeatable.
April 19th, 2007 at 11:06 amI would beg to differ with one of the posters comments about Oshkosh having a shot at the MRAP contract (other than providing the few that they have already been contracted to build).
Force Protection’s Cougar and Buffalo mine protected vehicles are the “Gold Standard” which all other manufactures will be judged against when competing for Delivery Orders from the Marines, MRAP contract.
All of the MRAP’s currently in theater are Cougars and Buffalo which are made by Force Protection Inc. Force protection has been delivering these life saving vehicles to the Marines and Army for a couple years. The Cougars have over 2,000,000 combat hours on them and have encountered over 2,000 IED blasts without a single fatality.
The Marines are in the process of procuring 8,000 more MRAP’s which should be on order the first part of May.
Go to www.forceprotectioninc.com and read a little about the company and their vehicles. What an awesome story.
Mr. Zippy
April 19th, 2007 at 11:35 amGuys, this is good end everything but the EFP’s or explosively formed projectiles the enemy likes to use these days in iraq, cant be stopped by anything. Not even our tanks. Hate to put a realistic spin on this, but this is the same problem man has had through the history of warfare. You can make something or someone more armored but is it cost worthy and does that make it or them as combat effective or mobile? These things probably move slow as shit, what are the drivers going to do when they get ambushed and cant get out of a kill zone fast enough?
April 19th, 2007 at 11:47 am
Dirt bag Harry Ried… What an ass hole. http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=070419184534.ileoeb47&show_article=1 I would like to sqeeze him so hard shit would come out his ears. Nothing like helping the enemey. If I out live him I will piss on his grave.
April 19th, 2007 at 12:30 pmabout time.
April 19th, 2007 at 12:48 pmI don’t care what it costs as long as it protects our troops.
April 19th, 2007 at 1:05 pmWHAT THE FUCK DID MURTHA EVER DO THAT WAS GOOD?
SHIT - Just listening to house arguments on the emergency spending bill.
He stands there screaming and yelling - spewing shit… the guy doesn’t deserve to be respected in any way. I don’t give a shit what he did in the past.
There is no way this guy was ever a leader!!!
April 19th, 2007 at 3:40 pm0311 -
I plan on it. He is from Searchlight Nev. bout an hour outside of Vegas, I drive by there at least once a yr.
Re the shaped charges with a copper ‘cone’, I saw it on weaponology, pretty well described and demonstrated.
April 19th, 2007 at 3:53 pmGoddamn that’s a sexy beast.
April 19th, 2007 at 9:19 pmDbo,
check out David Marcoe’s response to shape charges, EFP’s are the same thing. I agree with you though. The enemy will adapt and they’ll get their result, but the new vehicles will make IEDs (with EFP mod) more expensive for the enemy and may cause an influx of Iranian weapons, maybe exposing Iran (even more) as a supplier?
In terms of the slowness of the Cougars/Buffalos/MRAPS…
April 20th, 2007 at 6:24 amthis is 3rd hand so don’t take it as fact… but, I hear Marine Corps SOP (standard op procedure) has changed from an, IED explodes punch the gas and get out of town, to an, IED explodes, debark from vehicle, regroup, and hunt insurgents in the area. Apparently this has caused a decrease in IED attacks against Marines. However, the Army is still operating under the, “get out of town” mentality. This SOP makes them a more desirable target. If the Army adjusts, speed won’t be as crucial as it is now, making the new armored vehicles even more vital.
D_Mac,
Replacing all our weapons would be hugely expensive. Part of why the Army dropped the XM-8 program. The 416 is expensive, and produced only by a foreign company. Part of the reason we aren’t using MP7s just yet in case you didn’t know is HK doesn’t want to license it’s weapons to an American manufacturer; which is extremely important to our brass. And although they’re nice, I’d just as soon keep my M4 as they’re practically the same damn rifle.
I don’t know if you’ve ever seen or worn dragonskin but it is too heavy and bulky to expect to do anything but sit in. Yes it works if all you want it to do is stop bullets and shrap. But that’s only part of the job.
I don’t think anyone here is qualified to speak on what we NEED in Iraq. If this was your wish list, disregard the above and please add .45s to replace these shitty berettas. Oh and armor upped Escalades. That’s what I wanna roll through the desert in.
Gonna bling up my PRC-117F Manpack. Fo’ sho’.
John,
April 20th, 2007 at 6:57 amAnd to think he represents US in PA.
thanks for the response ez rider
April 20th, 2007 at 12:07 pmjeez, i bet that thing runs on 2 baby seals an hour.
April 22nd, 2007 at 3:27 pm