RE: http://tech.military.com/equipment/view/142058/cougar-h...le.html?eq_id=142058

Awesome equiptment. I want one!

Looks big and clumsy but seems to have some good protection.

It might look big and clumsy...but if I saw this come into town, then I'm running. Put a 40mm. grenade launcher or .50 calber gun and you really have a killer.

Good and Bad. You see one of these roll down your street you say what the frick. you see a group of police men (soldiers, Marines) less likely to draw attention and statisticly less likely to be ambushed, an un-mounted patrol is actually a harder target.

Dont hate me for calling it the way I see it. First, before I shred the thing, I should make it absolutely clear that my company (me) has patented and developed a counter IED System. It is called Autonomous AutoSensing AutoDeploy Armor System (AAAAS). It has a reaction time in the sub millisecond range.
With that being said as a premise. Let me simply say, that it is typical to see a huge hunk of metal thrown at the problem. Why not just buy old Brinks Trucks if your gonna do that? This vehicle will be worthless in any "wetlands" in other wars surely to come our way. We wont always fight in the "desert". Hows that thing do in coastal swampy areas? (can anyone say "Vietnam", so you'll forgive me if I say it is a SCAM perpetrated on the good soldiers and taxpayers of this country to line their own pockets. The answer is "intelligent armor" not tons of steel that sink like a battleship?
Please don't think of these things from a testosterone point of view, instead imagine an system that envelopes the crew if a detonation takes place. Doesnt that make a whole lot more sense? If you want, I'll be happy to post a picture of a blown up cougar........ sorry, sometimes the truth stings. Dump these money suckers now! Best to all, DW

Force Protection claims there has never been anyone killed in their vehicles.

We used two of these on route clearance missions in OIF3.Great protection,turret hatch a little too confining.An IED took out the camera,not a scratch on anybody.

The MRAPs are a welcome though overdue addition to the troops, I wish and want only the best for our men, women in all services so their families can be at relative ease about their loved ones at war.

The "race" between a murderous enemy bent on defeating any and all countermeasures that we and our allies can respond with is nothing new to those who've "been there and done that". The aforementioned EFPs are a motley and deadly mix of DIY to OtS (off-the-shelf) ordnance stolen, smuggled or more likely provided by other powers hostile to us and ours, Iran clearly at the top of the list, though they themselves produce less as compared to their own outsourcing/purchasing from other nations that "look the other way".

The point is easier said than done, we must clearly confront the suppliers of the OtS and other ordnance related contraban at the source and STOP them. The enemy will still improvise no matter what but the denial of the OtS supply will diminish their ability to do greater harm to our troops, our loved ones. It also requires a measured and decisive ruthlessness that only those who've fought wars may understand. The MRAPs are necessary, but sooner or later some of ours will have to leave those armored confines and take the fight into the enemies faces and THEIR HOMES...

From a Veteran's Son, Brother & Father.

quote:

Originally posted by mricepik:
Dont hate me for calling it the way I see it. First, before I shred the thing, I should make it absolutely clear that my company (me) has patented and developed a counter IED System. It is called Autonomous AutoSensing AutoDeploy Armor System (AAAAS). It has a reaction time in the sub millisecond range.
With that being said as a premise. Let me simply say, that it is typical to see a huge hunk of metal thrown at the problem. Why not just buy old Brinks Trucks if your gonna do that? This vehicle will be worthless in any "wetlands" in other wars surely to come our way. We wont always fight in the "desert". Hows that thing do in coastal swampy areas? (can anyone say "Vietnam"(?), so you'll forgive me if I say it is a SCAM perpetrated on the good soldiers and taxpayers of this country to line their own pockets. The answer is "intelligent armor" not tons of steel that sink like a battleship?
Please don't think of these things from a testosterone point of view, instead imagine an system that envelopes the crew if a detonation takes place. Doesnt that make a whole lot more sense? If you want, I'll be happy to post a picture of a blown up cougar........ sorry, sometimes the truth stings. Dump these money suckers now! Best to all, DW

From the SCI website:
SCI & New Team Map Road to Anti IED Armor

Sunday, March 16, 2008

For Immediate Release:On Creating Anti IED Armor
SCI is engaged in discussions with a Newly Forming Team. The continuing road to mapping a path to bringing this amazing Counter IED Armor to the field to do what SCI does best, protect soldiers.
end..
OK/DW
______________________________________________________________________________

Okay Mr. Woroner, I won't hate you for calling it the way you see it, so don't hate me for the terse tone of my response: I'll take the chance that YOU are not trolling and be forewarned: Credentials aside, you are making some substantial claims. What are you bringing to the table here and not with the military or gov't purchasers? Armor has its value, it always will critics aside, but if you possess an effective, cost efficient, life preserving countermeasure that WORKS and is or will be verified by separate testing via Aberdeen/Ft Knox and selected independant facilities AND you want to discuss, reveal, convince honorable members of these forums of your own touted technology. Then elaborate but don't sell any services or products here, that's against the TOS which everyone is obliged to read.

Otherwise if you are trying to spread the word amongst the concerned here that have loved ones (as I do) in this fight to win genuine support of a proven new technology of yours THAT WORKS, then welcome aboard and speak up...

BTW, you use the well-worn cliche of "can anyone say Vietnam?". Yes many here CAN say it, only here you'll find a majority (including my Father and I) that say it within CONTEXT, with MEANING and EMOTION...

From a Veteran's Son, Brother & Father.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: GoldenSabers,

Also a continuation of my previous thread on this topic that is now locked.


--------------------------------------------


10,000th MRAP Delivered to DoD

(Source: US Department of Defense; issued July 3, 2008)

The rapid response by the Department of Defense to protect the warfighters reached a major milestone today when the 10,000th Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicle rolled off the assembly line and into government hands.

In February 2008 the MRAP program office, headed by Marine Corps Systems Command, recorded its 5,000th MRAP vehicle acceptance. That milestone was reached less than a year after the Secretary of Defense Robert Gates made MRAPs the DoD’s top acquisition priority. Since then, the program has advanced at near-unprecedented speed, doubling production of the life-saving vehicle in just over four months.

Gates said, “This is a significant achievement. This program has gone from zero to ten thousand in just about a year and a half. These vehicles have proven themselves on the battlefield and are saving lives”

"The many successes of the joint MRAP vehicle program are the result of an overwhelming team effort by the many players in this program," said Marine Corps Brig. Gen. Michael Brogan, MCSC commander. "From production to integration, from transportation to fielding, many commands and organizations have played major roles in this program.”

Within weeks this 10,000th truck, which is built to help withstand close-up impact of an improvised explosive device while protecting people inside, will join its predecessors on the front lines in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Marine Corps Systems Command in Quantico, Va., is the designated joint program office and manages the overall program for DoD. Before being shipped overseas, the MRAP will be installed with weapons, radios and other equipment by the Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command center at Charleston, S.C. From that point U.S. Transportation Command takes over and moves the vehicles by air and sea to the combat zone.

The final contract order for MRAP vehicles is expected later in the summer, bringing the overall total more than 15,000 vehicles in the current build-up.

-ends-

GAO Warns of Runaway MRAP Costs

LINK

July 17, 2008
Associated Press

WASHINGTON - The accelerated pace the military has used to buy and deploy thousands of heavily armored mine resistant vehicles for Iraq and Afghanistan could lead to problems with maintenance and cost overruns on the top priority project, according to congressional investigators.

Congress has appropriated $22 billion to acquire more than 15,000 mine resistant ambush protected vehicles, also known as MRAPs, to protect troops from roadside bombs and other insurgent ambushes, according to the Government Accountability Office report. Defense Secretary Robert Gates designated the program as the department's highest priority acquisition last year.

That meant testing of safety and performance occurred while the vehicles were being bought, raising the possibility costly errors would be uncovered after the fact. More than 100 vehicles the military paid for were not fielded because of problems discovered after their purchase, according to the GAO report made public Wednesday.

"While the department's concurrent approach to producing, testing, and fielding the vehicles has provided an urgently needed operational capability, it has also increased performance, sustainability and cost risks," the GAO concluded.

The MRAP program has so far fielded 6,600 vehicles for the Army and Marines. They are made by contractors that include units of the British firm BAE Systems, General Dynamics Corp., and a unit of heavy truck maker Navistar International Corp.

The MRAP vehicles have been in high demand from commanders in Iraq since 2005 after insurgents began to use explosives that could penetrate the armor of troop carriers and other vehicles. An even more durable version, known as MRAP II, is currently under development.

Cheryl Irwin, a spokeswoman for the Department of Defense, said the Pentagon had received the report and would respond to it.

"This is something the leadership in the department is going to take a look at," she said Wednesday.

The GAO also said the number of contractors involved in building MRAP vehicles could prove costly and create delays. Using a wide range of vendors may lead to problems finding parts for the different types of vehicles each contractor produces, and the military is still in the early stages of training technicians to repair them all.

The purchase of MRAPs has been largely funded through supplemental defense budgets, emergency spending measures the GAO said can obscure the cost of long-term maintenance. Those costs have not yet been determined, the report said.