Airborne Combat Engineer

Study: Lack of MRAPs cost Marine lives

More than 700 U.S. troops died from roadside bombs because the Marine Corps' devotion to a military vehicle years away from deployment kept it from buying available Mine Resistant, Ambush Protected (MRAP) trucks, according to an internal Marine report obtained Friday by USA TODAY.

Instead of fulfilling an urgent Marine request from the field for 1,169 vehicles in February 2005, Marine Corps leaders and analysts delayed fielding the MRAPs, and instead bought more armored Humvees, the report written by Marine science adviser Franz Gayl says.

RL|USA Today|2008Feb16Sat

Composite HMMWV

TPI Composites and Armor Holdings, Inc. have unveiled a new light-weight, all-composite HMMWV. The new vehicle, which is part of the U.S. Army's All Composite Military Vehicle program, will be the first of its kind. The prototype vehicle was designed to demonstrate weight savings and durability in a tactical truck for the U.S. Army that can provide soldiers with maximum protection and performance.

The vehicle is the result of an 18-month research and development program with the U.S. Army TARDEC and AM General. The vehicle will serve as a demonstration of how TPI can apply its composites technology to other military vehicles or vehicle components produced by Armor Holdings.

Space War

Is a trike in your future?

The CLEVER vehicle is a compact city vehicle for two with a tandem seat constellation. The length is 3066 mm, the width is 998 mm and the height is 1388 mm. The gross weight is less than 400 kg. The wheelbase is 2450 mm, the track width is 835 mm. At the front there is a 17" wheel whilst at the rear there are two 18" wheels. As a result of its low width the vehicle is designed to tilt when cornering and has a computer-controlled hydraulic rolling system which results in a driving experience with zero lateral forces at tilting angles of up to 45°, similar to riding a motorcycle.

Clever Project

The history of three wheeled vehicles is interesting. Some of us are old enough to remember seeing those vehicles on the street.

optional ACE comments in the continuation

PEA fuel system cleaner

If you believe your engine needs more engine cleaning additives that that required in all gasolines, there's a cheaper way to get it than paying ten to twenty cents more per gallon for medium and high grade gasoline.

You can add a bottle of gas treatment containing polyether amine [PEA] every $7500 miles.

The leading brand containing PEA is Techron Fuel System Cleaner, but PEA is beginning to show up in other brands, such as Mighty VS-7, which should work just as well.

Here's a recommendation for it at a BMW board:

You should clean your BMW's fuel system every 7500 miles with Chevron's Techron additive. The reason I use Techron over the multitude of other fuel system cleaners is because Techron is the only fuel system cleaner that I've seen that's been consistently recommended by mechanics. The other fuel system cleaners may or may not work, but I've heard only good things about Techron.

Motor Trend Magazine recommends Techcron for those sensing a loss of power and performance:

If the loss of power and performance is due to combustion chamber deposits buildup..."the current state of the art treatment is an addative called polyether amine (PEA). Developed by Chevron and originally introduced in 1980, today it carries the company trade name TECHRON®."

Pour the additive into the tank before filling up with regular (unless the manufacturer specifies a higher-octane gas).

Now that ACE's 2002 Sierra Denali pickup (with 6L engine -- new ones have 6.2L) is crossing 50K miles, he'll probably start adding a bottle every 7500-10,000 miles, even though the engine seems to be running as good as ever, and keep buying a good brand of regular.

Some cautions in the continuation

Do you buy mid- or premium-grade gas?

"Using high-octane gas in a car designed for regular accomplishes little except more rapid combustion of your money.

... government regulations require detergents in all grades of gasoline."

Straight Dope

Some of ACE's highly educated friends have bought the sales pitch in the ads, and believe mid-range gas will keep their car engine cleaner and more efficient. But, independent experts don't agree.

The bloom is off hybird sales, under full cost analysis

A recent J.D Power survey is showing something very disturbing for all those environmentalists, and that is new car owners are choosing diesel cars over hybrid versions.

Although not long ago hybrid vehicles seemed as if they were increasing, it now seems as if sales are now slipping. The overall drop in sales is something like 7%, but for buyers aged between 16 to 25 to drop is around 13%.

The sad thing is that the whole hybrid message seems to be getting lost, which is a sad thing for our environment and one of the reasons is that new buyers refuse to pay $2,396 extra for a hybrid version vehicle.

Although hybrids are hoped to help the fight against global warming, people will not help to do their bit if it is not cost effective for them, as hybrids work out to be more expensive. Yes, running costs are far cheaper, but it takes a while to get your money back on the bigger price tag you have to pay.

J.D. Power

Hybrids, the talk of the (motor) town just a few years ago, seem to have already peaked in popularity, even as Detroit continues moving toward them (turning Detroit is like turning the Titanic). GM appears to have played its cards right, concentrating on diesel instead of hybrid. And, ACE is told the new diesel engines are much better than the converted gas V8s GM tried back in the 80s.

The neighbor has a Hummer? No problem.

Fork out about $100-125k for the International MXT. (International is a Navistar company.)

Pentagon dithering turned troops into sitting ducks

"On Monday, USA TODAY reported that the Pentagon has known for years that vehicles called MRAPs could keep U.S. troops safer from most roadside bombs, but until recently it did little to deploy the vehicles to Iraq, even as hundreds of Americans died. [This was the cover story of yesterday's USA Today, with the above photo on the front page.]

The Pentagon has numerous explanations for this. Planners didn't think the war would last this long. MRAPs are more expensive than armored Humvees. Adding armor to Humvees seemed like a quicker, better solution.

Not one of these excuses holds water."

USA Today opinion

The MRAP acronym is actually a recent concoction, and the huge vehicles built on 18-wheeler frames (such as those from Force Protection) are a design only a few years old, but better vehicles than the Humvee have been available (from other countries) throughout this war. The "not invented here" syndrome blocked their purchase while the DoD funded slow-moving academic research projects (such as the one at Georgia Tech) geared toward developing a replacement for the Humvee in the next decade.

To modify a lefty phrase: "The Pentagon slowly plied, while good men died."

Optional VERY long-winded ACE comments in the continuation, as this is one of ACE's long-standing pet-peeves (if a problem which has cost thousands of lives can be described by such a trivial term)

IG critical of MRAP contractors

A report from the Pentagon's Inspector General, obtained by DANGER ROOM, is accusing the Marine Corps, the Army, and suppliers of armored vehicles of contractual wrongdoings which "increased risk to the lives of soldiers."

One of the themes that the report highlights is the resistance of officials to pursue competition, even when it was evident that other options were out there.

NS / Danger Room

Force Protection and Armored Holdings are used as examples.

See also the other articles linked at the bottom of the linked article.

Half of MRAPs ordered

At this point in the competition, we are very close to the halfway mark. Of the envisaged 7,774 vehicles, 3,707 (46.7%) have now been ordered. Thus far, BAE Systems' share is 14.3%, in 3rd place behind Force Protection (48%) and Navistar (32.8%).

DID