- 2,186
- 87
- 48
- Location
- Zimmerman MN
-
Steel Soldiers now has a few new forums, read more about it at: New Munitions Forums!
Sweet Candy!
- Thread starter 1 Patriot-of-many
- Start date
porkysplace
Well-known member
- 9,604
- 1,494
- 113
- Location
- mid- michigan
Don't see anything in the video about "The Russians"
Last edited by a moderator:
I watched something similar a couple of years ago. No new news. The only issue for the JLTV vs HMMWV. Is the HMMWV was designed to be a truck used during combat and the JLTV is designed to be a more active part of combat.
To me the JLTV is a necessary upgrade seeing what we are asking the vehicle to do. It would be less necessary if we did not ask troops to contain and occupy areas where we are not wanted.
To me the JLTV is great and will much better support our troops. The HMMVW is just a multi-function truck; it is a 4 door, 2 door, comms vehicle and ambulance lots of configurations, I do not think the JLTV does that.
I love the HMMWV and hopes it still has some life for its limited roll.
To me the JLTV is a necessary upgrade seeing what we are asking the vehicle to do. It would be less necessary if we did not ask troops to contain and occupy areas where we are not wanted.
To me the JLTV is great and will much better support our troops. The HMMVW is just a multi-function truck; it is a 4 door, 2 door, comms vehicle and ambulance lots of configurations, I do not think the JLTV does that.
I love the HMMWV and hopes it still has some life for its limited roll.
QUADJEEPER
Member
- 797
- 6
- 18
- Location
- Winter Springs, FL
Would be a nice daily driver!
riderdan
Member
- 313
- 20
- 18
- Location
- Central Kansas
From my understanding the JTLV isn't a "replacement" for the HMMWV and the Army will continue to use HMMWV's for "truck"-type jobs... things like delivering troops and materiel around inside compounds or between CONUS bases. The JTLV will be used more like an APC or scout car. It's not intended to deliver T-rats to infantry in the field, or to carry ammunition. It's meant to take part in combat--and it's way better suited to being a gun truck, or a TOW vehicle than the HMMWV. Which was never designed for that and which did its best in up-armored variants but wasn't really satisfactory in that role.
If you look at what Oshkosh produced, it's pretty clear that it's not really a "truck" in the same sense as a HMMWV. It's a combat vehicle. For that purpose, it's vastly superior. But for "truck"-type jobs, the HMMWV will probably stay in use for the foreseeable future.
If you look at what Oshkosh produced, it's pretty clear that it's not really a "truck" in the same sense as a HMMWV. It's a combat vehicle. For that purpose, it's vastly superior. But for "truck"-type jobs, the HMMWV will probably stay in use for the foreseeable future.
Action
Well-known member
- 3,575
- 1,561
- 113
- Location
- East Tennessee
around 1:53...
"The new vehicles are smaller, so they can be more easily airlifted and transported."
Smaller than what? an MRAP?
"The new vehicles are smaller, so they can be more easily airlifted and transported."
Smaller than what? an MRAP?
- 2,186
- 87
- 48
- Location
- Zimmerman MN
HAHA that's what I thought too, when they were compared side by side....... I'm sure they are lighter too........