Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Combat Support Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Should the Guardian ASV replace the Hummer?
TriggaFingaz    11/13/2005 7:50:41 AM
Currently, the M1117 Guardian Armoured Security Vehicle is only used by MP companies. Should it totally replace the Hummer armament carriers as a patrol vehicle elsewhere in the Army units based in Iraq? It has the advantage of being an armoured vehicle built from the ground up, while the M1114 Hummer is actually a truck modified to be a frontline battle wagon. Consequently, it is underpowered and its chassis will fracture within a short time. I'm not advocating that all Hummers are obsolete- I still adore them as a US Army symbol and veteran mule, a worthy jeep replacement. Rather, they should be relegated to transport, logistics, C&C and ambulance duties only while the armanent carriers are a supplement to the ASV rather than a mainstream patrol truck that has little chance of surviving IEDs and RPGs. (Yeah, I know the current M1114 may protect its crew from these attacks but is often written off).
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
EKG    RE:Should the Guardian ASV replace the Hummer?   5/19/2006 3:50:57 AM
I say no. It offers little extra protection against RPGs, and its tires can still light on fire and cook everyone inside or at the least, render it immobile. Wheeled vehicles really do not belong in close combat of any kind. The only vehicles going into combat should be Abrams (although its not perfect) and M113's with pre-det RPG cages and maybe some applique armor. Even without that stuff the M113 is still better then a Hummer, which Somalia proved is little better then an Escalade. Bottom line: wheeled vehicles have no place in urban combat.
 
Quote    Reply

TIP-TIP    RE:Should the Guardian ASV replace the Hummer?    10/3/2006 3:01:26 PM
Like it or not wheeled vehicles do see combat, it might be a M915A1, it might be an M1114 or it might be an M1117.  With the type of war we are currently fighting there is no way around it.  I would also like to say that there is no way i would every let an M113 go out on a convoy with M915's All that would do is slow down the convoy and Piss off all the members of the convoy.  But you are probably right about the armor on the M1117 but it is better that the HMMWV And that's what we need at this point.  I'm not saying it should completely take over the M1114's Job but it should deffinately take that much weight off the HMMWV's shoulders
 
Quote    Reply

Wiz    don't forget cost performance and limited budget   3/18/2007 1:38:06 PM
<i>The only vehicles going into combat should be Abrams</i>
 
Did some one forget about cost and mobility? The military budget is not infinite and not all troops will get a MBT. We have to think about options that will allow to give protection to many soldiers as possibile. It sure will cost a lot if we give MBTs to all soldiers in an environment like Iraq. Tracked vehicles also require frequent maintenance for the tracks. Some may require Strykers, but it's rather a armored taxi, and there will be dead extra space used for nothing for security missions. M1117 are cost effecient, cost more than hummers, but still cost less than tracked vehicles as well as Strykers. M1117 ASV 150 also has a turret to protect the gunner, IED protection, and with the additional kit, survivability against RPGs. In environment like Iraq, what is needed are 1)protection against RPG and 2)IED 3)sniper fire against the gunner which insurgents use most frequently. M1117 ASV 150 in that term has all three protection with the least cost out of the rest of alternatives.
 
Quote    Reply

flamingknives       3/18/2007 2:20:23 PM
Thought for the day;

Blow a wheel off a wheeled, armoured vehicle, and most times it will be able to get away under its own power.
Set the tyre on fire (pretty difficult) and it's going to be able to get over the horizon before being disabled.
Shoot a modern armoured vehicle tyre full of holes and mobility is scarcely reduced.

Break a track on a tracked vehicle and it's going nowhere. 

Wheeled vehicles have strengths and weaknesses, and so do tracked vehicles. They are  different and not necessarily more or less suitable for any given combat operation.
 
Quote    Reply

historynut       3/19/2007 1:56:03 PM
While I don't know if the M1117 is the best for the job it is a lot better then a hummer.
To replace the hummer you need a vehicle designed to survive IED's and RPG's.
While Strykers are nice for the most part a smaller vehicle with a remotely operated weapons station that can be operated from under armour would be best. If you look at how the Germans used a mix of armoured cars in WWII to protect truck conveys there was a mix of small lighty armed (mg's) armoured cars backed up with larger more heavily armed (cannon) armoured cars.
Using engines, transmissions etc of vehicles now in use it would be easy to built a petrol vehicle with a low design and build cost.  

 
 
Quote    Reply

av8ter172       8/11/2007 9:12:28 PM
Heres the bottom line on the issue, no vehicle is going to survive every possible encounter, and for defeating RPG's well thats asking alot when the rpg-7 is known to penetrate up to an inch of steel.   The problem in urban areas is finding a mix of survivability and manuverability. The 114 meets the requirement especially with the add on armor being used in Iraq, the 1151 and 1152 variants are even better. AS far as the ASV goes its a great vehicle but its size makes it a little more limited as to the areas it can operate in as well as slow production time and high cost causes the 1117 not to be a practical replacement for the 1114 1152 and 1151 but it is a great adaptation.  and for the abrams guy, the tank looses a major advantage in urban enviornments, It's exaust vents make it weak in the rear, and can easily be taken out by a large enough IED, or an RPG or a 50 cal round.
 
Quote    Reply

av8ter172       8/11/2007 9:13:21 PM
sorry typo, i meant foot of steel
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Rasputin       8/12/2007 12:23:01 AM
Saw a media report of a US M1 Abrahams tank commander who had suffered lots of combat stress, but despite his pleas was still sent back to Iraq.

However instead of getting an M1 abrahams, his entire unit got the deathVees or Humvees. In a couple of days, an IED blew up his deathvee  and he was dead.

Then they did another segment about real armour vs humvee armour. Now the US army is not even going back to the M113, but going back to the pre 70s vintage commando V200 armoured cars which were the most popular exports to 3rd world allies of United States. (kind of the like the BRDM soviet wheeled scout car, well the V200 was often used as an armoured scout car)

The soldiers using the slightly refurbished and rearmed V200s (some able to carry 25mm cannons like the bradley) said that the bottom V hull, and the armour just makes the 70s vinatage armoured car way safer than any uparmoured humvee. And more will be brought out of the moth balls.

Somehow the army seems to want to push on with wheeled vehicles instead of tracked ones like the M113. There are so many M113s kept in reserve. Is the US keeping them in reserve in case of another full on conventional warfare conflict that occurs while the war in Iraq continues? Cos it is still being kept in reserve

 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics