• Steel Soldiers now has a few new forums, read more about it at: New Munitions Forums!

  • Microsoft MSN, Live, Hotmail, Outlook email users may not be receiving emails. We are working to resolve this issue. Please add support@steelsoldiers.com to your trusted contacts.

 

Brand New MRAPS Being Scrapped - A Sad Day

Status
Not open for further replies.

Beretta92fs

Member
50
0
8
Location
Clayton, NC
Let GL auction them from Sealy. I would buy one just to hide from the mrs. She couldn't even fly her broom into that baby to fuss at me! I'd be good to go till I had to come out for some of her cooking...Not to mention they would surely bring a tad bit more than $3500 a piece off GL even with the EUC headache.
 

BKubu

Well-known member
Steel Soldiers Supporter
4,725
1,088
113
Location
Gaithersburg, MD
Folks, this is nothing new. Policy has been that Armor isn't sold to civilians from the military since the 50's. On the flip side, think how much of that stuff is being left over seas. If it becomes property of another country, you could import it then!
That is incorrect, at least when I have asked about American armored vehicles overseas. For whatever reason, once an American armored vehicle leaves the country, you can't get it back in. There probably are exceptions, but this has been the rule that I have been told. I tried to get an M113 brought back to the country.
 

juanprado

Well-known member
Steel Soldiers Supporter
5,508
2,709
113
Location
Metairie/La (N'awlins)
How about NASA's Michoud facility in New Orleans, 43 acres air conditioned under one roof. Last time I checked we no longer manufacture Space Shuttle tanks or any space craft. Park the MRAPs in there, put them up on blocks, remove the 6TL's, and fuel stabilize them. If they are anything like the MV's in my warehouse, they will fire up after a 5 year nap and run like the wind!
It is another mind blowing waste the decommissioning of this plant. Some of the computers and furniture have made it out on GSA auctions but no real revitalization of this plant so far and the 1000's of jobs it supported. There was talk of building wind mills there but I don't think anything has come of it and unlikely due to the banana republic brain trust that runs this State as their personal Napoleonic territory. :)
 
Last edited:

silverstate55

Unemployable
Steel Soldiers Supporter
2,068
855
113
Location
UT
That is incorrect, at least when I have asked about American armored vehicles overseas. For whatever reason, once an American armored vehicle leaves the country, you can't get it back in. There probably are exceptions, but this has been the rule that I have been told. I tried to get an M113 brought back to the country.
That's a shame, but it's our reality. After all, these days Perception Is Reality.

Personally I have no qualms about MRAPS in civilian ownership...from a market forces perspective, I'd bet that they would command pretty high prices, high enough to make them collectible and very unlikely to be used for nefarious purposes. One could make a case using NFA items & registered destructive devices as an example: the owners of these items have gone through so many bureaucratic hurdles, cut through so much red tape, and spent so much hard-earned money that the chances of them using the registered items for illegal purposes are statistically NIL. In nearly 22 years of LEO experience, the ONLY times I've run across or even heard of registered NFA items being used for criminal purposes involved stolen weapons/devices.

Which brings us almost full-circle (and is the #1 argument I've heard from upper LE management & legislators/lawmakers): if such items were allowed to be purchased by civilians, after undergoing NFA-type background checks and paying hefty fees, what is to prevent someone else from stealing the MRAP from the owner's property? I.e., the retard who stole the M60 tank several years back from the NG Armory in San Diego and went on a freeway rampage, and a few other incidents? Should the owner be required to prove that the vehicle could be secured, as museum vehicles are frequently required to be (batteries removed, no fuel in tanks, no fluids in engine, etc...)? Well, now we're on a flight of fancy, as it's all moot anyway... It's a shame to see these vehicles cut up.

I have no problem with these being passed on to civilian owners, but I don't make the rules. I've sat in on legislative & administrative hearings on LE agencies receiving these vehicles, and the necessary safeguards & maintenance requirements, etc... I would think that the specialized tools and expensive repair parts alone would scare most potential buyers away; you'd need a pretty good pocket book to keep one in roadworthy condition.

Oh well, what do I know anyway... :cookoo:
 

bikeman

Well-known member
Steel Soldiers Supporter
2,894
501
113
Location
Ft. Bragg, NC
I can safely state that not ALL MRAPs are being destroyed. We are retaining an amount, we just "bought" more than we could use. Due to size/weight/maneuverability, etc... they will not replace the standard HMMWV on post, but they are not being completely removed from the play book.

Also, part of it has to do with which types we are retaining, we have 3 main variants (MaxxPro, Caimen, RG33) with multiple variants and other small batch ones/companies. to keep the logistical system (IE Class IX in this case) from being overwhelmed, the military is only keeping certain ones. I thought I knew which we were, but I now think I am incorrect. We will see as things are flushed out over the next few years.
 

glcaines

Well-known member
Steel Soldiers Supporter
3,836
2,403
113
Location
Hiawassee, Georgia
I just heard on the news yesterday that all the MRAPS in Afghanistan are scheduled to be destroyed when we leave, apparently none going to the Afghans. It sounded like they were to be destroyed on-site and not brought back to the U.S.
 

Hainebd

New member
520
5
0
Location
Mays Landing, NJ
I am sure some will survive and be in our hands soon. Just takes time. I still don't know why they ordered so many. In the privet sector the vp of production who be handed his hat and given a bonus too.
 

bikeman

Well-known member
Steel Soldiers Supporter
2,894
501
113
Location
Ft. Bragg, NC
I just heard on the news yesterday that all the MRAPS in Afghanistan are scheduled to be destroyed when we leave, apparently none going to the Afghans. It sounded like they were to be destroyed on-site and not brought back to the U.S.
I would not believe that *ALL* MRAPS in AFG will be destroyed. Some might be, especially if they have been damaged/Battle Lossed/Non-repairable. But there are ones that will be coming back for use in our formations.

I would believe that we are not giving them to the Afghanies. They are having enough issues with their Nissans and Toyotas let alone trucks they have to order parts from the USA to repair. I do think we are giving them HMMWVs, like Iraq, but I'm not 100% as I wasn't involved in that part.
 

Another Ahab

Well-known member
17,826
4,161
113
Location
Alexandria, VA
I can safely state that not ALL MRAPs are being destroyed. We are retaining an amount, we just "bought" more than we could use. Due to size/weight/maneuverability, etc... they will not replace the standard HMMWV on post, but they are not being completely removed from the play book.
I imagine the seller did nothing to discourage that over-buying.

During the Civil War, here in the U.S. between 1861 and 1865, being mostly from Maryland (a border state), we had family on both sides of the fight.

In a nutshell, Southern family pretty much lost everything. They all had to start over, from scratch.

But one family that took the Yankee side, made a killing so to speak. Not as a combatant, but as a vendor. He sold salted beef to the U.S.; and he sold a LOT of it.

That side of the family has been in money ever since (not saying that's how they made it all, but it was a good start). I think the U.S. Army Corps of Quartermasters might have even "bought a little more than they could use" back then, too.

Selling in wartime to Uncle Sam (or most any government, likely) can return a mighty pretty penny.

Don't know that I blame the seller completely; why would you want to say "stop"?
 
Last edited:

saddamsnightmare

Well-known member
3,618
80
48
Location
Abilene, Texas
January 15th, 2014.

Since they are internal combustion engine vehicles, mothballing them can be difficult and expensive. If they were sold overseas, they would just give our present and future enemies a look at the technology and maybe even ownership of it. And lastly, they have no place in civilian hands here in America, historic or not, they are a threat in their continued existence. I suggest loading them on an obsolete steam ro-ro and sink the lot in the Challenger or Marianas deep, at least the fish would enjoy them at that depth.(Could load a few surplus M-1 tanks and send them down too). And being what they are, if they were sold overseas as lend lease, you couldn't bring them back stateside legally anyways.
 

sigo

Lieutenant Colonel
Steel Soldiers Supporter
1,684
353
83
Location
Leavenworth, KS
I imagine the seller did nothing to discourage that over-buying.
Of course they didn't. Why would they? Manufacturers manufacture, that's what they do. DoD asks who can make the item to meet the specifications and in the quantity required. The private industries within the military industrial complex are more than happy to oblige. That's capitalism, and for all of capitalism's faults I think it's the preferred method of doing business. Sure people got crazy rich, but I'm happy I had everything I needed to fight my tiny piece of the wars. War is an incredibly expensive proposition, but throwing a TON of money at it undoubtedly allowed many more service men and women to come home than if we were sent without the full backing of congress's big, fat, giant pot of taxpayer money (or big, fat, giant pot of IOUs...).

With that said, do not go into the merits of why were were/are over there, the fact is we are fighting and I'm glad we spare no expense. All we can do now is learn from it and try to make the best decisions for our future. Hopefully decisions regarding the disposition of these MRAPs are good decisions. Time will tell. Without a doubt we need to tighten our belts and cut the waste, but it's a shame there isn't a better way to handle this MRAP business. I say, if you have a better plan blow up your congress critters inbox and let them know. Maybe this is a prime opportunity to start a business storing gov't MRAPs for future use. One of you smart guys run the numbers and see if you can bring them home and store them long term for less than it costs to destroy them in place.
 

Rickv100

New member
63
0
0
Location
NJ
The Marines decided that the MRAPs are too heavy and expensive to maintain and too complicated to give to our allies in the Near East.

Speaking at the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies Wednesday afternoon, Lt. Gen. William Faulkner revealed elements of a plan to donate unwanted MRAPs to partner nations within Central Command as Marines balance efforts to retrograde from Afghanistan with a mandate to get lighter and more compact as a service.
“The bottom line is, we don’t need them,” Faulkner said of the MRAPs remaining in Afghanistan. “We don’t need as many as we have today.”

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/art...MRAPS-won-8217-t-coming-home-from-Afghanistan
 

Another Ahab

Well-known member
17,826
4,161
113
Location
Alexandria, VA
The Marines decided that the MRAPs are too heavy and expensive to maintain and too complicated to give to our allies in the Near East.

Speaking at the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies Wednesday afternoon, Lt. Gen. William Faulkner revealed elements of a plan to donate unwanted MRAPs to partner nations within Central Command as Marines balance efforts to retrograde from Afghanistan with a mandate to get lighter and more compact as a service.
“The bottom line is, we don’t need them,” Faulkner said of the MRAPs remaining in Afghanistan. “We don’t need as many as we have today.”
It is anathema for this to come from the mouth of a Seabee*; but speaking as a taxpayer I always liked the U.S. Marine Corps:

- as a Federal entity they get more done with less than probably any other single agency of the entire U.S. Government

They always have, and likely they always will. "Lean-and-Mean". The USMC gets it done.

(*former Seabee, so maybe that buys me an exemption)
 
Last edited:

Rickv100

New member
63
0
0
Location
NJ
The Marines typically have been the least funded of the armed services. There has been talk of disbanding the Marines to save money but that is a different story.
 

Another Ahab

Well-known member
17,826
4,161
113
Location
Alexandria, VA
The Marines typically have been the least funded of the armed services. There has been talk of disbanding the Marines to save money but that is a different story.
My guess is that all of THAT noise is coming from out of either the Army or the Air Force. I'm thinking that we disband and dissolve BOTH of them, and go it with the USN and the USMC alone. Probably do a better job, and at half the cost to boot.

I mean let's just talk flying skill, as one single instance of competence: is there one single pilot in the USAF who can:

- Land on a Carrier?

- While Under Weigh?

- At Night?

- in Foul Weather?

- and all of these at the same time?!

Uhm: what was the OP here again?
 
Last edited:

JingoJohn

New member
67
0
0
Location
Denver, COLORADO
My question Is why don't they just store them In mothball for possible future use? We do It with ships & planes. Why scrap?
Because "naughty" Patriots that Janet Napolitano catorgized as "THREATS" after WE answered our countries call, AND RETURNED ALIVE AND HEALTHY, might get our hands on them.

The GESTAPO does NOT want we Patriots to have the same goodies they have!
BTW, this is NOT a political statement! This is a statement of FACT.
 

Another Ahab

Well-known member
17,826
4,161
113
Location
Alexandria, VA
Because "naughty" Patriots that Janet Napolitano catorgized as "THREATS" after WE answered our countries call, AND RETURNED ALIVE AND HEALTHY, might get our hands on them.

The GESTAPO does NOT want we Patriots to have the same goodies they have!
BTW, this is NOT a political statement! This is a statement of FACT.
Me neither, my comment was not a political statement either.

Just a common vanilla everyday plain-and-simple run-of-the-mill rant. That's all::rant:
 
Last edited:

JingoJohn

New member
67
0
0
Location
Denver, COLORADO
saddamsnightmare said: "...And lastly, they have no place in civilian hands here in America, historic or not, they are a threat in their continued existence...."

HUH? Sounds strangely like the mantra of gun grabbers.
Oooommmmm evil hardware, Ooooommm evil hardware. Ooommm (text representation of commie chanting mantra)
Sooooo throw me off the site! Block me! I am TIRED of this crap! saddamsnightmare can go to the Huffington Post with his DOGMA!

BTW, I got my two M923A2's out of Sparta and they PURRRRR LIKE KITTENS! I drove one to Columbus where I picked up an XM1073 trailer then to WVa and picked up a very small tractor then to denver Colorado. Roughly 2500 miles with NO PROBLEMS and PURE JOY of ownership!

ON MY WAY OUT THE DOOR TO THE BLACK LIST of steel soldiers; THANK YOU ALL for the references to the TM on the 923's!!!! The help and advice you guys gave me made the trip possible WITHOUT incident!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top
AdBlock Detected

We get it, advertisements are annoying!

Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website like our supporting vendors. Their ads help keep Steel Soldiers going. Please consider disabling your ad blockers for the site. Thanks!

I've Disabled AdBlock
No Thanks