BobS
New member
- 108
- 1
- 0
- Location
- All over/ USA
This is going to be sort of long-winded..so please bear with me....halftrack said: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: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".
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?
There were several SLEP (Service Life Extension Program) projects on the M35's and M939's. The M35A3 was a great improvement for the 2.5T vehicle. Prior to FMTV (actually they overlapped for me) there was a program GM/MVO won called the MTD (Modern Technology Demonstrator) program. This was done on an M939 5T and consisted of an evalustion of potential components and technology for application to the FMTV program evaluation by TAACOM.
MTD was basically a new suspension, an early version of traction control (from Rockwell), STE-ICE integration on a new commercial engine (from John Deere- a 6466H), high travel leaf suspension, and EATON CEEMAT transmission (this trans was supplied by TAACOM), and finally, a low cost CTIS. One of the vehicle requirements was to be able to remove a powertrain (engine and transmission) from the truck in 20 minutes in the field with nothing else than a 5T wrecker and its toolset. I am not saying I agreed with this, but this iswhat I had to design into the vehicle.
To make a long story short, we met all the specs (we were actually able to do a hot engine R&R in 15 minutes and 20 seconds and were able to ground hop the powertrain on the ground from the truck electrical and computer system). The point to this is that the original M35 was (and still is) a decent vehicle, good for specific applications.
However, automotive technology and understanding is not static. As more and more vehicle applications are built, those of us doing this job learn more about how to make a vehicle more effecient, less complex, easier to service, easier to drive, better handling, safer, stop quicker, etc. Knowledge is not static.
As a result, it is not a fair comparison to compare a truck designed in the 1950's to a truck designed in the 1980's. There was 30 years of learning that simply did not exist in the 50's. They are as different as an M37 Powerwagon from a 2005 Dodge Powerwagon. (OK, I admit that is a bit of a stretch)
My point is, I like both-one is not "better" than the other. It all depends on what you are trying to accomplish. Using a rebuilt 40 plus year old truck to do today's job is not safe for the guys doing today's military jobs. Likewise, as Joaquin has found out the hard way...trying to use Libby as a personal vehicle, that is rock reliable in Baja, AIN'T the way to go without extensive OEM support. Apples and oranges.....
Sorry, I am not trying to evade your question. I am saying your question is not specific enough to form a definative answer. I would love to be able to own and use both.
FMTV is markedly superior to the M35 off road. At the Milford Proving Grounds (GM's PG in Michigan), I could take a loaded M35 around the track (including the 60 percent fore and 30 percent side slopes) in 5 minutes and 10 seconds, approximately. This was running the truck at the maximum speed I could withoout breaking anything. By comparison, the LMTV could run the same course in under 4 minutes at almost 2 times the speed. "Mobility is safety" in action.
The LMTV could also be loaded faster (it used an ISO style bed, instead of a fixed side as on the M35's of the time), had better balance (it was not tail heavy when loaded) so it stopped faster and straighter in panic stopping, the LMTV also could cool better than the M35 (seems like a small item, but the M35 could not ever pass the TAACOM cooling system specs the LMTV had to deal with-those changes came from the overheating issues the Israeli's had wit htheir M35's in the '67 war).
I apologize if that doesn't satisfy your request for a "yes or no" kind of answer. I simply cannot reasonably just "pick one" without any qualifications-they both have strength and weakness.