Comments by "Stan Wagner" (@Buck123four) on "Is the American JLTV really that good of a Tactical Light Vehicle?" video.

  1.  @thomasjefferson7584  My last tactical environment was in Mogadishu (1993) in a totally unarmored HMMWV. Not even canvas. But the JLTV is far superior to any HMMWV or MRAP. Yes, it is taller, but that extra foot or so at a distance of 100 yards is totally irrelevant. Reliability, protection, off-road mobility, electrical power generation, NET-ready, towing capacity, etc. put it light years ahead of anything else. The test reports are available from ATEC are available if you want to read them.
    5
  2.  @swaghauler8334  I drove one at Bragg 74-75. POS wouldn't downshift; if ya wanted to slow down ya had to come to a stop, then start over. How effed-up is that?
    3
  3.  @thomasjefferson7584  With LRAS-3, AND a turret, not sure how much more SA ya need. The back-door windows were replaced with bigger windows, and front facing camera installed. The windows are just about the same size, or bigger, than MATV windows used in Iraq / Afghanistan. Sorta interesting how they were acceptable in combat, but UNACCPTABLE in CONUS. I think some complain too much. Protection or SA? The current solution seems acceptable to the vast majority.
    3
  4.  @swaghauler8334  Only Gama-goat you'll see will be in a museum.
    2
  5. When bullets start flying & bombs start exploding...JLTV is the ONLY solution to keep troops alive.
    2
  6.  @thomasjefferson7584  The Armor community - for the past 20+ years - has complained about their vehicles...yet they have never developed the requirements for one since about the year 2000. It was a coordinated program with the Brits, but it was cancelled, the British called it the "TRACER" system (I forget the US name of the program).. Then they wanted the M1025. Then they wanted the M1114...but the Commandant of the Armor School hated the M1114 reliability, which was about 200 miles between breakdowns at the Scout operational mode summary / mission profile. Then Strykers came around, and I believe some of them were used as Scout / Recon vehicles. Then OIF / OEF came around, and PROTECTION became Job Number One with MRAPS being the solution. And the HMMWVs got heavier & heavier, and their reliability was terrible, and their protection against certain threats was terrible because of the lack of ground clearance. Then JLTV started in 2005, and contract award in 2015, and fielding in 2019. And that is it. If the Armor community really wants a standalone Scout vehicle, they need do something about it beside complain. Since "TRACER" was cancelled around 2002, nothing has made it above the "I wish we had a XYZ system" level. For the time being, JLTV is it, unless the pathetic HMMWV is retained, or use the Bradley. Good luck.
    2
  7. Until lightweight Unobtainium armor is invented...steel is the armor.
    2
  8. Thanks for a good summary. Many people commenting have zero idea what they are talking about...set them straight.
    2
  9.  @VictorianTimeTraveler  Lots of truth in that, but when the USA comes into town in force, they are sorta hard to miss. Long time ago in Europe, my unit had armored Mercedes & BMW 700 series; SOME Generals preferred a local rental car due to reasons you stated.
    2
  10. 100% wrong. It runs CIRCLES around any HMMWV, on or off road. Runs up and down hills at max armor - no problem.
    2
  11.  @JamesPhieffer  Good answer. Someday...but not TODAY.
    2
  12. Same company makes both.
    2
  13. It underwent HUNDREDS of thousands of miles of testing...and blast testing.
    2
  14. It will run CIRCLES around any HMMWV, on or off road.
    2
  15. OFF ROAD it runs CIRCLES around ANY HMMWV.
    1
  16. That is amazing, isn't it? Tracing simple things & IDing who worked on it...
    1
  17. I NEVER heard the M151 called a "mutt." And ford didn't build the M151.
    1
  18. JLTV has soft soil mobility the MATV could only dream of. And, has 10Kw Onboard & 10Kw Exportable power, Victory compliant for ease of various electronics, and is 10X as reliable as any HMMWV. MATV Job 1 was PROTECTION. JLTV has it all, or nearly all.
    1
  19. True. But they become automotive engineers after driving it for 2 hours... :)
    1
  20. 49,099 is the number. Lots of HMMWVS will be around. And the maintenance issue is over-stated.
    1
  21. They underwent ballistic & technical testing by the best test agency in the world - and passed.
    1
  22. Sure...everyone knows that - NOT.
    1
  23. Who cares what the hood is made of? Tis NOT a trampoline. // Batteries die all the time; stop at an auto parts store & see what they have...BATTERIES. // EVERY engine on EVERY wheeled vehicle in the Army & USMC is "exposed." // The CREW is important - NOT an engine.
    1
  24.  @manictiger  NO JLTV went to the Taliban. ZERO. NONE.
    1
  25.  @manictiger  Oshkosh makes / made the MRAP-ATV. It LOOKS like the JLTV, but is about 25% bigger. MRAP-ATV was fielded throughout the theater; not so the JLTV.
    1
  26. Has capabilities the MATV never had...
    1
  27.  @theimmortal4718  The "light" unarmored vehicles do nothing of importance that the ORIGINAL HMMWV didn't do. They added some trivial capability and said it was superior because of blah blah blah BS. They bamboozled some generals...one of whom is now retired & the VP of a company making the little vehicle. Ain't that heart-warming? No fraud waste abuse in those programs....
    1
  28.  @sofineri2471  They ARE transportable by CH-47 & CH53. Not as far as a unarmored HMMWV, but armor weighs more.
    1
  29. JLTV wasn't fielded till 2019. You likely had the MATV, same company makes both.
    1
  30. No one ever thought of that.
    1
  31. The SF folks have much HIGHER GT scores than the rest of the Army...and much more maturity. That comes in handy all around, as compared to a bunch of 26 year old PV2s who beat around for years before enlisting, and suddenly become Automotive Engineers - in their minds.
    1
  32. The advent of cell phones essentially made MOST electronic devices EMP protected.
    1
  33. You could say the EXACT SAME THING about a Bradley, or a Stryker. Waste of money? The Chief of Staff of the US Army & the Commandant of the Marine Corps disagree with you.
    1
  34. The only ones that need armor protection are the ones that will get hit by a mine, IED, or small arms fire. If anyone knows which ones those are - please sound off.
    1
  35. It has no more computers than a 2018 VW Jetta.
    1
  36.  @Tagawichin  Seats 4 - just like the HMMWV. A JLTV trailer is available. The HMMWV trailer was destroyed when towed behind a JLTV because the HMMWV trailer couldn't handle the terrain / speeds the JLTV achieved.
    1
  37. So is every other Army / USMC vehicle.
    1
  38. Try not to get shot, huh? You can do that be refusing to go on any mission...and get court-martialed & booted.
    1
  39. Not JLTVs...NONE were there. None.
    1
  40. 1. JLTV has BETTER vision than a MATV, which no one had issues with in combat. 2. HOW do you know what its blast resistant capabilities are? Have you seen ANY that experienced enemy fire / IEDs / mines? 3. Yes, is taller than a HMMWV...but at 200 yards, one can't see the difference. 4. NO Army / USMC trucks have protection for anything but the crew compartment - NONE. 5. If you feel that strongly about it...write the CSA of the Army, or the Commandant of the USMC; they would LOVE to hear from you. :)
    1
  41.  @geraldrawlings8756  Yer obviously wrong...and don't have much of a security clearance...sorta like the OTC rep.
    1
  42. Thats Crazy Talk. If a vehicle doesn't have armor...the crew is toast, actually, several hundred pieces of body parts.
    1
  43. ANY operator can change a tire. The "veh mtx sqdrn" guys need find a better job, cuz they are sure trying to PROTECT their jobs. A tire is a tire...it ain't rocket surgery.
    1
  44. A Jeep that hit a mine or the smallest IED would be demolished. The crew would be incinerated / demolished / blown into literally a thousand small - very small - pieces.
    1
  45. MATV was fielded FAST - Protection was Job # 1. JLTV went thru a full scale development program...and is more reliable, huge electric production, made for all comms to be integrated, has its own trailer, etc. 95% + of components are industrial standard.
    1
  46. JLTV off-road mobility is vastly superior to any HMMWV; it has the same range as any other vehicle. Runs CIRCLES around ANY HMMWV off road - FACT. And vastly outperforms any vehicle on road.
    1
  47. No - it is NOT geared especially for the Mid-east. It was built for ANYWHERE in the world. ANYWHERE.
    1
  48. The one that rolled was due to NEGLIGENCE - anything can be rolled...if yer stupid & try real hard.
    1
  49. Interesting - but what does that have to do with JLTV?
    1
  50. You couldn't be MORE WRONG if you tried. JLTV is the most capable “light” vehicle the Army or USMC have ever fielded. JLTV can run circles around ANY HMMWV; the original HMMWV or the current up-armored ones. Circles, big or small, with a 3,500 pound payload (4-door) or a 5,100 pound payload (2-door). Towing capacity of 11,000 pounds. Mobility in soft soil / soft sand far superior to any MRAP or any HMMWV. JLTV is built for the current conflicts – AND for the future - anywhere in the world, anytime. It has 10Kw onboard power, 10Kw exportable power, and is fully NET-ready. Superior protection, superior reliability, superior performance all around. Transportable by C130, C17, C5, CH47, CH53, and airdrop certified. Designed and tested to mount TOW, M2, M240, & M249. USMC has launched anti-ship missiles from JLTV. Light duty police work, huh? I think not.
    1
  51.  @Fabrizio_Ruffo  It replaces the HMMWV. Plain & simple. I won't go off & discuss the Price of Rice In China...JLTV REPLACES a HMMWV.
    1
  52.  @Fabrizio_Ruffo  The variants are Utility / Shelter Carrier (2 door), Command & Control / General Purpose, Heavy Guns Carrier (weapons carrier), and TOW Carrier (close combat weapon system)...and a special JLTV Trailer - because the HMMWV trailer can't handle the terrain a JLTV negotiates & a HMMWV couldn't. Was never intended as a "general transport," whatever that is. But the Army & USMC have plenty of transport / logistics vehicles. Useless? Gee - two guys named Milley & McConville approved the full-rate production decision, mebbe ya oughta check with them.
    1
  53. A: Yes, it is.
    1
  54. Do you hate them that much?
    1
  55. It was tested for about 300,000 miles in the US, as well as extensive ballistic testing. It has "MRAP-like" protection, certified by the best test agency in the entire world.
    1
  56. You likely had the MATV. JLTV wasn't fielded until 2019. They look the same, but MATV is about 25% larger.
    1
  57. Have you served in a combat zone with HMMWVs? HMMWVs SUCK IRT protection AND off road mobility. JLTV runs circles around any HMMWV, on or off road. They ARE taller than HMMWV, but an additional foot in height is meaningless at operational ranges...
    1
  58. Every 28 year-old E4 mechanic is now an automotive engineer...even though they barely passed their GED test. They are Pure Genius...just ask them.
    1
  59. That capability is for USMC JLTV to fit on prepo ships where HMMWVs had been stored...they didn't wanna buy new ships.
    1
  60. "Standard" vehicles have ZERO ability to handle the armor. Just about all parts of the vehicle start breaking; suspension, transmission, brakes, drive train, etc. IT DOESN'T WORK...unless al the vehicle will do s drive very slowly on totally paved roads at slow speeds.
    1
  61. The ENTIRE CREW is lost without air conditioning, so it is a moot question. Heat stroke kills just as surely as a bomb does. Millions Millions of vehicles travel the deserts with AC daily.
    1
  62. They make about 90% of the vehicles used by the Army & USMC. They know who is their bread & butter.
    1