Filed under: Government/Legal, Tech, Military
Contender for next-gen HUMVEE looks battle-tested in Baja
Now that the Hummer -- the original Hummer H1 -- is distinctly out of flavor, the U.S. armed services are busy looking for its replacement. Having put out a request for proposals, one of the supposed leading candidates is this: a Joint Light Tactical Vehicle developed by Navistar and BAE Systems, Inc, a British defense industry firm. The two together already provide the H1's temporary replacement, the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicle.
The Mad Max monstrosity has the same track as the H1, but that's about all they have in common. Built of many off-the-shelf components from Navistar's parts bin, the truck's modular build configuration makes an easier job of modifying it for different missions and repairing. It's shaped to disperse charges from roadside bombs, the armor is an inch thick, it has a flat floor to allow exit from either side of the vehicle, and it can escape a battle without a wheel and without engine cooling. Not bad. Follow the link to get the full specs on the military's potential new charge. But if they want something even more brutish, they could always go for this.
You may also remember that the producer of the original H1, AM General, is also working on its own candidate for the next Joint Light Tactical Vehicle, which we've yet to see.
[Source: Motor Trend]
_opt_thumbnail.jpg)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Mondo 2:42PM (3/24/2008)
Anything that can better protect our troops should be well received.
Reply
Injun Joe 2:50PM (3/24/2008)
Amen, to that, Mondo!
NYChic 2:51PM (3/24/2008)
Can't wait until the civilian version is available!
And for those of you too daft to get it, yes, I am completely kidding.
Reply
Mr. Oak 2:58PM (3/24/2008)
I'm not though. Perfect vehicle for drive-bys.
f3rg 3:00PM (3/24/2008)
Yes, I'll take mine with 24" "rims" (I won't be needing spokes or tires), a full leather interior and lots of chrome, please.
Toy Yoda 3:50PM (3/24/2008)
Drive Bys? As in drive by shootings? hehe.. funny.
Dan 2:59PM (3/24/2008)
it'll look great once they get some chrome rims on it
Reply
dan spalinger 3:02PM (3/24/2008)
Maybe I missed it...but where does it say it was tested in Baja??
Reply
71cuda 3:15PM (3/24/2008)
The phrase "at photoshoot" was left out.
Guenther 3:08PM (3/24/2008)
That thing looks like it employs NONE of the finesse that went into the HMMWV. Looks terribly heavy, but if the future is urban combat, then this might be the answer.
Reply
Owain Ozymandias Buck 3:27PM (3/24/2008)
Finesse? Are you serious? YOU drive one of those slow, heavy, rattly things over a few hundred miles of crap roads and rocky desert and then tell me how much "finesse" a HMMWV has. I've put many miles on the things--Don't believe the hype!
Guenther 3:59PM (3/24/2008)
Little things like being under 11' high, or tires that a person could change (would I stand around in Baghdad and change the tire on a US anything? no). Were HMMWVs nice? of course not. What I'm getting at is that the vehicle being replaced had some really cool engineering bits that no only proved themselves well, but have since been copied by several other makers of light tactical trucks.
R 4:27PM (3/24/2008)
Well, the fact that the replacement will be able to drive with only 3 wheels should help. It'll also have a slew of other engineering upgrades, at least in the prelim.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Light_Tactical_Vehicle
The HMMWV was simply not designed for what it's being used for.
BGJ 3:11PM (3/24/2008)
"it has a flat floor to allow exit from either side of the vehicle"
Not sure what the floor has to do with using the doors on either side of the vehicle.
I haven't read the Motor Trend article, but perhaps it meant to say something about exiting downward through the floor?
Reply
dan spalinger 3:20PM (3/24/2008)
Have you actually TRIED to exit an H1?? Perhaps you should try...then go and throw 100 lbs. of gear on and try it again...then take some hostile fire and try again....the H1's axle creates a HUGE hump right down the middle of the vehicle making it very difficult to get from one side of the vehicle to the other in trying to exit....
71cuda 3:29PM (3/24/2008)
My guess is that the body is high enough to eliminate the driveshaft/axle humps. It would make for easier exit in the back and especially front from either side. Nice if the doors on one side are unable to open, and you have to exit quickly.
BGJ 8:42PM (3/24/2008)
@dan -
If I had actually been in one then I would have known that. I would not have to carry 100lbs or take hostile fire to figure it out. Not sure what your point is. The OP did not make it clear exactly what "flat floor" meant.
Exiting downward would have some advantages, no? Don't some APC's have this feature?
spacegravity4me 3:55PM (3/24/2008)
reminds me slightly of the warthog.
Reply
Zeus.:God 10:49AM (3/25/2008)
Uh... I don't see how it possibly could.
Alex 3:57PM (3/24/2008)
correct me if i am wrong, but that "something even more brutish" you link, is the current MRAP.
Reply