All_Around_Brown

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18356061/

This has gone too far, for too long.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Real World

We've been through this before. This system has worked well in testing, but under perfect conditions. In Iraq, where the fight is now urban, a buck-shot counter measure system is not ideal. We run mixed op patrols with Strykers, humvee's, Bradley's, and infantry walking along side. When a protectile, or RPG comes flying in, the system is going to activate, and may very well intercept the projectile, but at what cost to the surrounding infantry, and/or civilians? I think the most telling fact about the TROPHY system is that Israel didn't use it during their incursion into Lebanon. Why not?

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him."
Leo Tolstoy, 1897

All_Around_Brown

The Torphy system received better grades across the board for performance under all situations, so Im not sure what you are trying to say. Because Israel didnt deploy them (which I dont know to be true anyhow), that is all the info one needs to make your assessment?

RW, I truly dont know why you are making excuses for what can be clearly seen as a case of corporate cronyism. Do you really care so little about the safety of our soldiers as to make weak arguments on behalf of Raytheon? I doubt they need you to give them your approval, theyve got billions of dollars in politicians already bought and voting accordingly. But, since youre the omniscient one...okay.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Real World

Yeah, I care so little that's why I try to undermine them everyday. Afterall, my brother is only a disabled vet.

I'm sticking up for nobody. People who think that this system is perfect and operational are wrong. Under ideal situations, aka, a test range, it works better than anything out there. In a combat setting like the one we're facing in Iraq, i.e. urban combat with mixed op patrols, that system is flawed. When an RPG comes flying in and you have civilians and soldiers standing in the line of fire, what's going to happen? The Israeli's didn't use it Lebanon, why? I saw BOR with Myers and William Hunt on, and Hunt told her flat out that her assertation was incorrect, that this system was workable, and ready for Iraq deployment. The only manner in which it might help would be with respect to convoy's, but I'm not sure if it has a deactivation mechanism for use in passing through urban area's. Beyond that, there are questions regarding it's weight (most up-armored vehicles are at, or beyond their weight capacity), cost ($200-300k per vehicle), and networking capabilities(most vehicles including Humvee's and Strykers are already short on electrical capabilites). For obvious reasons, there isn't alot of information about the system available, as it's new, and top secret. Most of the info out there is specualtion & heresay, based on anonymous sources. Anything is possible, I'll forever concede that, but the fact that Israel didn't use it kinda tells me something.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him."
Leo Tolstoy, 1897

ArmyPatsFan

"The Army faced mounting criticism about not considering the Trophy system for the protection of its armored vehicles deployed in Iraq. Maj. Gen. Jeffrey A, Sorenson, the Army’s deputy for acquisition and systems management explained the decision (AFPS) saying the Israeli system is not a “produceable item.” The Israelis have been working on the Trophy system for 10 or 11 years, Sorenson said. “If this thing was ready to go, my question would be, why wasn’t it on the particular tanks that went into Lebanon?” he said. No Israeli Merkava tanks carried the Trophy system, he said.

Other problems include the fact that the system right now has no reloading capability. Once it fires, that side of the vehicle is vulnerable. Which brings up another shortcoming: the Trophy can only be mounted to protect one axis. This means officials would have to mount multiple missile systems on every vehicle. The Quick Kill missile has 360-degree capability and a reload capability.

Another worry is collateral damage, he said. “In a tight urban area, the Trophy system may take out the RPG, but we may kill 20 people in the process,” Sorenson said. “That is a concern we have that we haven’t fully evaluated.”

http://www.defense-update.com/products/t/trophy.htm

Procuring and fielding items to the US Army is very difficult. Are the parts available ..... do we have th correct integration kits and installation kits? ...... is there a logistical change required ..... what tactics need to be changed to integrate this with current doctrine ..... what training is required?
How does it integrate into the network? Does it recognize Civilian/Friend movement?

The list goes on and on. Now..there is a Rapid Fielding Initiative that takes items that are COT and places them in units hands...but usually on a much smaller scale. Is there resistance to this because of the money invested in FCS......probably a bit....I do not deny the pull of the large defense contractors. But is is not a black and white as MSNBC makes it out to be.

(This was all covered a couple of months ago in another thread)

__________________
"An army is a team. It lives, eats, sleeps, fights as a team. This individuality stuff is a bunch of bull****."
- General George Patton Jr (...hmm maybe BB)

All_Around_Brown

I agree that the implementation of this is decidedly difficult. My problem is that given the choice between a two year wait time and a seven year wait time, one would assume that the lesser wait time would save lives. And yet, to get the thing up and running from scratch as they are planning to do, adds time and testing to the mix and lives will be lost as a result.

Is Trophy perfect? Probably not. Is it better than anything coming down the pipeline from Raytheon...most definitely.

Again, the head to head proving cannot be ignored.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

ArmyPatsFan

I agree...if it works and fits into our doctrine then it should be tested and fielded by the Army. I do not agree that the Raytheon product will be inferior..... the Raytheon product is really being developed to be integrated onto the FCS systems..... completely different in all ways from the legacy force vehicles (M1/Bradley) and the Stryker.

Regardless....your initial one liner caught my attetnion as someone who does not understand the process/issues involved in fielding something like this.... unfortunately it takes time...and the process is laborious and political (ie...cancel a program within Congressmen/woman A's district.... no support on the next military pay hike bill.....etc) I wish it would change but Congress/DoD/Army/Industry all are a part of the big Acquistion problem. I don't like it either but it is far more broad than this administration or the DoD.

__________________
"An army is a team. It lives, eats, sleeps, fights as a team. This individuality stuff is a bunch of bull****."
- General George Patton Jr (...hmm maybe BB)

All_Around_Brown

True that. The acquisition problem just keeps on reminding me of Ike and his very prescient warnings about the complex.

It seems to me that someone was lying when they claimed all these things that Trophy couldn't do, in favor of Raytheons version, when it came out that Trophy could do these things and do them better than Raytheons version. The whole thing smacks of conflict of interest.

Thats the problem -conflict of interest and the potential for that to delay something that could save lives.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

patsfan13

This sort of issue is nothing new, see the problems associated with US torpedo's during WW2.

__________________
"Some guys play in all-star games, some guys don't. I don't know who picks all those all-star teams. In all honesty, I don't know who picks the combine, for that matter," Belichick said. "How does (Miami-Ohio offensive lineman Brandon) Brooks not get invited to the combine? How did Vollmer not get invited to the combine? I don't know. We can't really worry about that. We just have to try to evaluate them the best we can."

All_Around_Brown

So along with the chimp in chief, you accept mediocrity even when it is harming our armed forces. Interesting.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.