- 10,852
- 723
- 113
- Location
- Front Royal, VA
Sorry, it fails in one area. Amount of room between the front bumper and my legs in the event of a front end collision with an enemy 3/4-ton vehicle and some crunchies.
-
Steel Soldiers now has a few new forums, read more about it at: New Munitions Forums!
Brand new FMTV spotted
- Thread starter 70deuce
- Start date
BobS
New member
- 108
- 1
- 0
- Location
- All over/ USA
Past lead design engineer for GM/MVO and 3 tours SEA/RVN as a maroon beanie prior to that. That enough experience?Tanner said:
BobS
New member
- 108
- 1
- 0
- Location
- All over/ USA
Unfortunately, given the design packaging parameters (also the reason the wrecker is a dud) we had to deal with, a COE was the only option to fit all the 1472 specs, the airdrop/airtransport, and VCI requirements into one vehicle, leaving your ONLY option as cutting your legs off if you do not like it....maddawg308 said:
- 3,585
- 7
- 0
- Location
- Parkville, MD
Bob:
First off thank-you for your service and for supporting Soldiers.
I did not mean to down talk the truck and we are firmly committed to them as our primary medium truck now. Go back to 1982 I was a transportation 2nd lieutenant in a truck company who loudly complained that our medium trucks offered no protection to my 64 Charlie now 88 Mike drivers from snipers or fragmentation. Sure the Army bought these and the design was approved but it did not get sent to the field for trials. Back then the dollars were being used to upgrade the M1 fleet and build Bradley fighting vehicles.
I used to take the three worst Soldiers in the company out with MILES gear and set up an ambush while the rest of the company was doing convoy training. We could kill every Soldier in the convoy with confirmed MILES kills before they could get out of the cabs of the trucks. We got tired of this and then just killed the NCO's so I could see what the Soldiers would do to treat causualties, collect CEOI's and send in a SITREP.
My point was back then and still is that the design did not take into account what every line operator knows and that is that sheet metal and glass will not stop a snipers bullet. This risk was the Army's decision and it made me think of ways to counter sniper fire by designing add on armor out of steel plate and sandbags. I grew up the son of a combat Soldier from WWII and knew they took actions to replace windsheilds with steel plate and harden their trucks.
The real problem is not with the design we have it is that the real requirements never made it to the drawing board. I still face this twenty-six years later in Korea where we have soft skin vehicles in a place we may have to fight tonight. It is a risk that Secratary Rumsfeld summed up. We fight with the Army we have not the one we might like.
The success in armoring these trucks in Iraq and Afghanistan is legandary in the way the replacement cabs save Soldiers. So all in all we have a truck that is off road capable to a lesser degree with the armor but these trucks put way more miles on the roads than off of them.
I would have prefered a renovated fleet and an increase in the HEMMT fleet as they are way better trucks
First off thank-you for your service and for supporting Soldiers.
I did not mean to down talk the truck and we are firmly committed to them as our primary medium truck now. Go back to 1982 I was a transportation 2nd lieutenant in a truck company who loudly complained that our medium trucks offered no protection to my 64 Charlie now 88 Mike drivers from snipers or fragmentation. Sure the Army bought these and the design was approved but it did not get sent to the field for trials. Back then the dollars were being used to upgrade the M1 fleet and build Bradley fighting vehicles.
I used to take the three worst Soldiers in the company out with MILES gear and set up an ambush while the rest of the company was doing convoy training. We could kill every Soldier in the convoy with confirmed MILES kills before they could get out of the cabs of the trucks. We got tired of this and then just killed the NCO's so I could see what the Soldiers would do to treat causualties, collect CEOI's and send in a SITREP.
My point was back then and still is that the design did not take into account what every line operator knows and that is that sheet metal and glass will not stop a snipers bullet. This risk was the Army's decision and it made me think of ways to counter sniper fire by designing add on armor out of steel plate and sandbags. I grew up the son of a combat Soldier from WWII and knew they took actions to replace windsheilds with steel plate and harden their trucks.
The real problem is not with the design we have it is that the real requirements never made it to the drawing board. I still face this twenty-six years later in Korea where we have soft skin vehicles in a place we may have to fight tonight. It is a risk that Secratary Rumsfeld summed up. We fight with the Army we have not the one we might like.
The success in armoring these trucks in Iraq and Afghanistan is legandary in the way the replacement cabs save Soldiers. So all in all we have a truck that is off road capable to a lesser degree with the armor but these trucks put way more miles on the roads than off of them.
I would have prefered a renovated fleet and an increase in the HEMMT fleet as they are way better trucks
- 10,350
- 74
- 48
- Location
- Meadows of Dan, Virginia
David, what percentage of the time are the trucks used to transport troops?
It may be a sensitive number, but the obvious point is that there should be a (possibly) new category of trucks, "armored cargo carriers".
It may be a sensitive number, but the obvious point is that there should be a (possibly) new category of trucks, "armored cargo carriers".
- 129
- 32
- 28
- Location
- Alta & Baja California
Needless to say...I'm looking forward to the day I'll be driving Libby with the hybrid Allison MT 653 / MT 654 & the a Marmon Harrington MGV 75R transfer-case! Then the only electronics in my off-road vehicles will be....My Ipod!
Hey Bob, did you find anything out about the axles?
Attachments
BobS
New member
- 108
- 1
- 0
- Location
- All over/ USA
You are welcome. That was more thanks in one statement than I recieved when I finally came home. End of story.ARMYMAN30YearsPlus said:
Please understand, I am not saying I agree with the parameters TAACOM made...I didn't then and I don't now. I got thrown out of Aberdeen for telling one of the "reviewers" of a particular FTX the prototypes had just completed (in an after action review performaqnce meeting) that he had just killed all his troops because of no armor protection of the cab in an unrealistic scenario, in front of the CG from TAACOM. Needless to say, I tended to be a bit of a loudmouth. They did not change their minds, unfortunately, so, as a result, troops are now saddled with, in my opinion, marginal parts (the axle you mentioned earlier-among other parts) that are being forced to perform under loading never planned for, or most importantly, accounted for in the design.
All of the officers in that meeting were from "the Point", with no practical experience at all. They just did not want to hear anyhting that contradicted their own preconceived ideas about deployment. Yes, I still have heartburn over this, some 25 years later. I still remember the field expedient armor added to the dueces on Hwy 1.
- 10,350
- 74
- 48
- Location
- Meadows of Dan, Virginia
BobS said:No past truck can perform up to the specification of FMTV in VCI/offroad mobility according to the test parametrers issued by TAACOM..........quote]
Are these requirements ever made public? It's easy for us hobbyists to overlook features required in new vehicles when we enjoy "roughing it".
BobS
New member
- 108
- 1
- 0
- Location
- All over/ USA
cranetruck said:Unless it is for a classified program, all RFQ"s (Request For Quote) from DoD and other agencies are all published in the Federal Register for public notification with classified sections (such as the EMI/EMF requirements) deleted and marked with the classification level. The FMTV program RFQ and RFP's (Request For Proposals) are not online due to the age of the program (1979 was the first RFP that Teledyne respnded to, and the program was awarded in 1992). All was before the public use of the Internet. I still have copies of the original at home (I am in Portland, OR not Detroit right now) somewhere.BobS said:No past truck can perform up to the specification of FMTV in VCI/offroad mobility according to the test parametrers issued by TAACOM..........quote]
Are these requirements ever made public? It's easy for us hobbyists to overlook features required in new vehicles when we enjoy "roughing it".
- 3,585
- 7
- 0
- Location
- Parkville, MD
Some more pictures of the FMTV
Here are a few pictures showing some issues with the FMTV and it being able to protect the Soldiers. I still am proud of all the efforts our team put together to get them armored up to protect Soldiers and we will live with this truck for at least the rest of my carreer.
Bjorn Our Soldiers ride in them quite a bit but now in theater only armored vehicles are allowed to carry Soldiers off of the FOB's
These are take from my time in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The frame rail on the damaged one happened off road in Afghanistan due to the armor cab being so heavy and the axle cycling past the stop.
Libby looks good can you tell us more about her?
I have more and will add them when I find them.
Here are a few pictures showing some issues with the FMTV and it being able to protect the Soldiers. I still am proud of all the efforts our team put together to get them armored up to protect Soldiers and we will live with this truck for at least the rest of my carreer.
Bjorn Our Soldiers ride in them quite a bit but now in theater only armored vehicles are allowed to carry Soldiers off of the FOB's
These are take from my time in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The frame rail on the damaged one happened off road in Afghanistan due to the armor cab being so heavy and the axle cycling past the stop.
Libby looks good can you tell us more about her?
I have more and will add them when I find them.
Attachments
BobS
New member
- 108
- 1
- 0
- Location
- All over/ USA
RE: Some more pictures of the FMTV
What would you like to know about Libby (other than my writing is still on the oil pan)?
What would you like to know about Libby (other than my writing is still on the oil pan)?
- 3,585
- 7
- 0
- Location
- Parkville, MD
RE: Some more pictures of the FMTV
Thanks Bob:
I wondered if that is a sleeper cab behind the crew space and what it shares with our FMTV fleet. Also how do you get one beside the obvious big wallet?
Thanks Bob:
I wondered if that is a sleeper cab behind the crew space and what it shares with our FMTV fleet. Also how do you get one beside the obvious big wallet?
BobS
New member
- 108
- 1
- 0
- Location
- All over/ USA
RE: Some more pictures of the FMTV
The big box behind the cab is the engine compartment-the radiator is on top, next to the charge air cooler (what most people call-incorrectly-the aftercooler), All service was specifically designed to allow the daily, weekly, forward area, and depot maintenance to be done from ground level, with the single exception of changing a radiator or CAC. You could even do an inframe overhaul of the complete engine from ground level. The cab I also started with was a Pinz, like S&S, however, I also incorporated the space claim of the HEMTT and fixed it's 1472 defeciencies. I also left an extra 12 " behind the crew for the misc storage of weapons, 4 - cannisters of 5.56 (800 rnds each), decontamination kit, NBC equipment, 2 cases of MRE's and some other stuff I cannot remember offhand right now, including LBE for 3 crew. With the lower floor across the cab, any of the 3 crew had much more "moving aroundspace" than in either the Teledyne or the S&S cab. The cost of this was the front approach angle was at the minimum of 45degrees, versus (as I remember) 49 or 50 degrees for the S&S, but we could both cross the 18 inch tall cement step with no problems.
The 1472 compliance was basically thrown out the window on the S&S truck- ours swept the drivability portion as well as the crew requirements of the measurements-lower NVH, lower input to the driver H-point (you may remember THAT little discussion a few weeks ago...LOL...most people thought I was full of .....(fill in your own expletive here). In conventional terms, the TTC truck (Tactical Truck Corp, or as some of us GM/MVO people called it "Tacky Truck") rode and drove as easily as an over the road commercial COE, but with less bouncing around.
What else do you want to know? (BTW-Joaquin can chime in here on the comfort level-he drove it cross country-literally!)
The big box behind the cab is the engine compartment-the radiator is on top, next to the charge air cooler (what most people call-incorrectly-the aftercooler), All service was specifically designed to allow the daily, weekly, forward area, and depot maintenance to be done from ground level, with the single exception of changing a radiator or CAC. You could even do an inframe overhaul of the complete engine from ground level. The cab I also started with was a Pinz, like S&S, however, I also incorporated the space claim of the HEMTT and fixed it's 1472 defeciencies. I also left an extra 12 " behind the crew for the misc storage of weapons, 4 - cannisters of 5.56 (800 rnds each), decontamination kit, NBC equipment, 2 cases of MRE's and some other stuff I cannot remember offhand right now, including LBE for 3 crew. With the lower floor across the cab, any of the 3 crew had much more "moving aroundspace" than in either the Teledyne or the S&S cab. The cost of this was the front approach angle was at the minimum of 45degrees, versus (as I remember) 49 or 50 degrees for the S&S, but we could both cross the 18 inch tall cement step with no problems.
The 1472 compliance was basically thrown out the window on the S&S truck- ours swept the drivability portion as well as the crew requirements of the measurements-lower NVH, lower input to the driver H-point (you may remember THAT little discussion a few weeks ago...LOL...most people thought I was full of .....(fill in your own expletive here). In conventional terms, the TTC truck (Tactical Truck Corp, or as some of us GM/MVO people called it "Tacky Truck") rode and drove as easily as an over the road commercial COE, but with less bouncing around.
What else do you want to know? (BTW-Joaquin can chime in here on the comfort level-he drove it cross country-literally!)
BobS
New member
- 108
- 1
- 0
- Location
- All over/ USA
RE: Some more pictures of the FMTV
Forgot to add...as Joaquin can attest, I cried when I saw this one up close after 20 years.It was my baby. Last I knew-TAACOM had schedualed all of the losers on the FMTV program to be crushed, and never sold to the public.
Forgot to add...as Joaquin can attest, I cried when I saw this one up close after 20 years.It was my baby. Last I knew-TAACOM had schedualed all of the losers on the FMTV program to be crushed, and never sold to the public.
BobS
New member
- 108
- 1
- 0
- Location
- All over/ USA
RE: Some more pictures of the FMTV
ADDENDUM 2:
Another little bit of info...If you look closely at those pics of Libby, you will notice that the entire cab can be made on a brakepress, less 2 cover panels. This was my idea to get around the refusal of TAACOM to allow us to design an armouring kit for the cab. For field expedient armourinbg, all you would have needed was a brake press, a torch, and some hardware, as all the attachment point reinforcements were there to make your own and install it in the field.
It is a bit harder to add to the S&S truck....
ADDENDUM 2:
Another little bit of info...If you look closely at those pics of Libby, you will notice that the entire cab can be made on a brakepress, less 2 cover panels. This was my idea to get around the refusal of TAACOM to allow us to design an armouring kit for the cab. For field expedient armourinbg, all you would have needed was a brake press, a torch, and some hardware, as all the attachment point reinforcements were there to make your own and install it in the field.
It is a bit harder to add to the S&S truck....
- 3,585
- 7
- 0
- Location
- Parkville, MD
RE: Some more pictures of the FMTV
Wow I like your truck! it should have been fielded out to Soldiers and let them make a significant call in what we got. I do like the fact that the engine is there where you put it as if you look at the FMTV the engine and drive componets are not easily protected and I have always said that one thing the Soldier needs besides armor is mobility and an engine strike with even a small arms round will take him down to heavy radio status.
I am really impressed with your truck and if you have the chance write an article about the whole affair and I will try to get it published for you in one of the Army logistics journals.
God bless you man I know now why your posts have been filled with techically correct information and well worth the reading. Tomorrow I will post the pictures I took of the armor cab installation on the FMTV's
Wow I like your truck! it should have been fielded out to Soldiers and let them make a significant call in what we got. I do like the fact that the engine is there where you put it as if you look at the FMTV the engine and drive componets are not easily protected and I have always said that one thing the Soldier needs besides armor is mobility and an engine strike with even a small arms round will take him down to heavy radio status.
I am really impressed with your truck and if you have the chance write an article about the whole affair and I will try to get it published for you in one of the Army logistics journals.
God bless you man I know now why your posts have been filled with techically correct information and well worth the reading. Tomorrow I will post the pictures I took of the armor cab installation on the FMTV's
- 10,350
- 74
- 48
- Location
- Meadows of Dan, Virginia
RE: Some more pictures of the FMTV
Thanks Bob for that information, yes, to repeat what David asked, don't let this dissipate into the past, the reasoning behind a particular design is always of value and often hard to figure out when looking at the end result.
I admire my 1969 xm757 (m656) design and am always finding new interesting stats on it.
BTW, is the "Libby" classified as a 2-1/2-ton? What is the wheel base?
Where did you locate the batteries?
Thanks Bob for that information, yes, to repeat what David asked, don't let this dissipate into the past, the reasoning behind a particular design is always of value and often hard to figure out when looking at the end result.
I admire my 1969 xm757 (m656) design and am always finding new interesting stats on it.
BTW, is the "Libby" classified as a 2-1/2-ton? What is the wheel base?
Where did you locate the batteries?
halftrack
Active member
- 1,018
- 9
- 38
- Location
- New Orleans, LA
Marines use the 7 tons as the primary mover of troops. We have a version called the "armadillo" just for troops and protecting them. Sorry, No pic. this time.cranetruck said:
Bob, I appreciate your superior knowledge that you bring to the forum. However, if you had to pick a side of the fence, which would it be. Do you think an upgraded M35A2 would of been better platform than the whole FMTV program? Yes, I believe the FMTV may have better off-road capabilities, but how much better? Wouldn't the cost savings itself been enough to overlook the difference in off-road capabilities? Basically, would of a upgraded M35 platform meet 95% or more of the TACOM's new specs?
bigbee
Member
- 645
- 4
- 18
Not all gone
BobS,
TAACOM didn't destroy the losers. When I can dig them out, I'll post some pics of the Teledyne units sitting in a disposal lot in Gaylord, MI about 1994. They went to a volunteer fire department in Maryland, IIRC. (I don't think the FD knew they were prototypes with limited parts availability) I'll post those in another thread.
Here, however, is a pic I borrowed from a movie rental website. The place is in California, and they promote this truck as "ready to blow up"
EDIT: I thought I had the MV rental website in my favorites list, but can't find it. I'll search for that also.
BobS,
TAACOM didn't destroy the losers. When I can dig them out, I'll post some pics of the Teledyne units sitting in a disposal lot in Gaylord, MI about 1994. They went to a volunteer fire department in Maryland, IIRC. (I don't think the FD knew they were prototypes with limited parts availability) I'll post those in another thread.
Here, however, is a pic I borrowed from a movie rental website. The place is in California, and they promote this truck as "ready to blow up"
EDIT: I thought I had the MV rental website in my favorites list, but can't find it. I'll search for that also.
Attachments
BobS
New member
- 108
- 1
- 0
- Location
- All over/ USA
RE: Not all gone
http://www.expeditionportal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=13201
I do not know how many people would be interested, but Joaquin is having a get together in November at his place for expedition people. Perhaps there would be people here interested in attending. I will be making a small presentation about several subjects related to vehicle design, parameters and operations, using Libby as the training aid....
To David and cranetruck: Thanks for the undeserved kind words. I am no one special-most of the people I know and deal with in this business really care and try to do the best thing for the grunt that has to use this stuff. Be sure to thank Tanner also...
As far as specifics on Libby, I should allow Joaquin to cover the specifics so people don't think I am just tooting my own horn (heck, I am so old I do too much tooting now and it's a major problem for me ) She was the LMTV version (2.5T) and was, IIRC, about 2 feet longer than the S&S truck- the wheelbase was more than that longer however, to provide more stability and a smoother ride for the crew within the acceptable footprint from TAACOM. The batteries were located on the right side, behind the engine compartment cover-you can see them here:
http://www.steelsoldiers.com/modules/PNphpBB2/files/libbydrop_862.jpg
Unfortunately, somewhere in time, Libby lost her top cover for the battery box.
To Brian: I did not know that TAACOM had released any of those trucks to the public. Thanks for the info. Like I said, I was so surprised when I found the pics of Libby on this site, and then got to go and see her again, it was a very emotional time. Libby was my first full vehicle design I was responsible for in my career.
...and we all know you always remember your "first"...
http://www.expeditionportal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=13201
I do not know how many people would be interested, but Joaquin is having a get together in November at his place for expedition people. Perhaps there would be people here interested in attending. I will be making a small presentation about several subjects related to vehicle design, parameters and operations, using Libby as the training aid....
To David and cranetruck: Thanks for the undeserved kind words. I am no one special-most of the people I know and deal with in this business really care and try to do the best thing for the grunt that has to use this stuff. Be sure to thank Tanner also...
As far as specifics on Libby, I should allow Joaquin to cover the specifics so people don't think I am just tooting my own horn (heck, I am so old I do too much tooting now and it's a major problem for me
) She was the LMTV version (2.5T) and was, IIRC, about 2 feet longer than the S&S truck- the wheelbase was more than that longer however, to provide more stability and a smoother ride for the crew within the acceptable footprint from TAACOM. The batteries were located on the right side, behind the engine compartment cover-you can see them here:http://www.steelsoldiers.com/modules/PNphpBB2/files/libbydrop_862.jpg
Unfortunately, somewhere in time, Libby lost her top cover for the battery box.
To Brian: I did not know that TAACOM had released any of those trucks to the public. Thanks for the info. Like I said, I was so surprised when I found the pics of Libby on this site, and then got to go and see her again, it was a very emotional time. Libby was my first full vehicle design I was responsible for in my career.
...and we all know you always remember your "first"...