At 11:21 PM 4/18/99 -0500, you wrote:
>While I understand that the FMTV's conform to special DOD standards I
>find it hard to believe that Navistar or Ford could not modify their
>truck lines to make trucks that meet the requirements. However
>considering all of the crap they would have to put up with it is probably
>in their best interest not to try and do so. I think that's sad as I
>can't believe that a major truck builder could not do as good if not
>better job than S&S. Perhaps the whole system is just too screwed up.
>Caterpillar still makes dozers for the military right? Why can't Ford
>and GMC still make trucks for the military? I don't think that it's a
>matter of they can't do it, the red tape to do so isn't worth it. Hence
>you get Mil trucks that can't do 44 mph on the highway safely.
Believe it or not, Freightliner is building trucks for the military. They
are currently (re) bulding M915A3 tractors, as well as building new dump
trucks to arguement the M929/930 series.
>I drive by huge cement mixers, 6 wheel drive behemoths all of the time
>that cruise with a full load of concrete down the highway (well in excess
>of 55 mph!), mixing away, then drive off road across all kinds of terrain
>to dump their load, then go do it again. If those companies can make
>mixers that can do that, then they certainly can make mil trucks.
Keep in mind that all 3 (!) incidents invovling the FMTV were with the 2
1/2 ton models, running EMPTY, at speeds greater than 44 mph. Do you think
the army would waste time with EMPTY trucks in combat conditions? I doubt it!
Also, the FMTVs in Bosnia have had their driveshafts replaced before they
were depolyed; hence, they do not have a speed restriction on them.
>Last week there was a large article in the Wall Street journal on the
>inability for the US forces to get to a destination quickly, ie get
>ground troops to Yugoslavia. I kept thinking about the FMTV's that
>can't run over 35 mph safely while I read the article. Certainly he
>FMTV's aren't helping the situation, are they.
>
>Dave Cole
>
>On Sat, 17 Apr 1999 20:46:18 -0500 jonathon <jemery@execpc.com> writes:
>>
>>>I must disagree to some extent with your #2 answer. This may hold
>>true for
>>>today's vehicles but, not long ago....
>>
>>I agree with your reply (which I did not repeat) but I was addressing
>>some
>>peoples complaints about the cost of the FMTV This vehicle was
>>designed in
>>recent history and is being built today. You cannot compare mass
>>produced
>>civilian trucks to specialty mil-spec ones. Not that I think that all
>>this
>>mil-spec stuff is necessary (which some is not) but that's the way the
>>DOD
>>does things.
>>
>>je
>>
>>
>>===
>>To unsubscribe from the mil-veh mailing list, send the single word
>>UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of a message to <mil-veh-request@skylee.com>.
>>
>
>___________________________________________________________________
>You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
>Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
>or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
>
>===
>To unsubscribe from the mil-veh mailing list, send the single word
>UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of a message to <mil-veh-request@skylee.com>.
>
-- -Shane****************************** Military Rails Online http://www.e5e.com/militaryrails ******************************
=== To unsubscribe from the mil-veh mailing list, send the single word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of a message to <mil-veh-request@skylee.com>.