quote:

Originally posted by AllenInWV:
I see no room for rucksacks, etc. unless they plan on strapping them to the roof.

The picture I saw on the news website had a bunch of duffels strapped all over the roof.

quote:

That it carries a full squad of 9 and can be inserted even by a UH 60 is full of win.

That is how I see it also.

Polaris makes a 4-5 man military version of their off-road utility vehicles that's smaller and lighter, don't know if the big govt has purchased any... I know a few sheriffs offices have bought them for rural patrol.

These vehciles are going to be used for fast in, fast out special forces. Might even leave the trucks behind if it gets hot enough and not even care.

quote:

Originally posted by caneau:
Onto specific points...
No, the military can't use a side-by-side ATV off the shelf. The military runs on diesel and jet fuel, not pump gas. There was a program a number of years ago to retrofit a KLR650 motorcycle to use diesel. It made for a $20,000+/unit bike. I'm sure someone at DOD is looking into the cost to retrofit a side by side though but it's not easy.

Nailed it. Any military acquisition process beyond SOF usage, and even then...needs to satisfy fuel and maintenance requirements.

quote:

Originally posted by bubbatime:
Polaris makes a 4-5 man military version of their off-road utility vehicles that's smaller and lighter, don't know if the big govt has purchased any...

Polaris has several vehicles contracted with the DoD, to include the MV850 ATV, MRZR and DAGOR, they are all with specialized units.


The ISV is going to general purpose light infantry units (82nd, 101st, 10th, 25th) as their battle taxi. The ATV type vehicles that's been used the last 15-years have been with specialized units. Up armored HMMWV, MRAP have all been exposed as being fuel guzzling, limited mobility, maintenance hogs requiring long logistic chains and big foot print support infrastructure. The HMMWV replacement, Joint Light Tactical vehicle satisfies the armored requirement.

Used to see the recon bubbas cruising around in these. The "M1161 Light Strike Vehicle".



http://growlerme.com/products/...htattackvehicle.html

As a vet with over 2 decades service in lots of different units anything beats walking, and considering the huge equipment burden on infantry today, even having a vehicle to haul your rucks extra water and ammo med supplies and act as a casevac vehicle is great. My “basic load” of gear for walking was 125 pounds, and knocking that down by 50% will make a huge difference in troops being able to move reduce injuries and reduce fatigue on missions. I doubt this was envisioned as a replacement for up armored vehicles

quote:

Originally posted by Broadside: First customer will probably be the 82nd Airborne and they probably have the logistics capacity to transport/deploy them wherever they need to go.

Was in the OP post...

quote:

The first vehicles will be going to the 1st Infantry Brigade Combat Team of the 82nd Airborne Division, but ultimately 11 IBCTs will be outfitted with 59 vehicles each under the first contract covering the 649 ISVs.

quote:

Originally posted by lyman:
and how long before someone in maintenance w/ a welder adds some plate, and pintles?

Pintle mounts will be apart of the larger package, hang, strap, mount too much and you reduce its mobility.

If a unit needs an armored vehicle, the new Joint Light Tactical Vehicle covers that need and replaces the HMMWV. You also reduce range, mobility, and situational awareness, not to mention the longer logistical chain to support.

quote:

Originally posted by captain127:
As a vet with over 2 decades service in lots of different units anything beats walking, and considering the huge equipment burden on infantry today, even having a vehicle to haul your rucks extra water and ammo med supplies and act as a casevac vehicle is great. My “basic load” of gear for walking was 125 pounds, and knocking that down by 50% will make a huge difference in troops being able to move reduce injuries and reduce fatigue on missions. I doubt this was envisioned as a replacement for up armored vehicles

Bingo. This is way better and safer than walking. More injuries come from non-combat operations than any shooting or roadside bomb.

Deploying a fully equipped squad that can move at 40 mph with two Blackhawks is super impressive. JLTVs cannot be slung under a UH-60. They are too heavy. And I don't believe they fit in a CH-47.

quote:

Originally posted by mbinky:
Used to see the recon bubbas cruising around in these. The "M1161 Light Strike Vehicle".



http://growlerme.com/products/...htattackvehicle.html

Exactly another know someone pay off contract/kickback. The Growler was a total failure. Sheeze. Now this fender, hood and frame nightmare. Some Generals are enjoying vacations to the islands and what is in the brown envelopes...LOL

Here's the original idea: