Talk:MRAP (armored vehicle)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces (general topics): Military technology and engineering task force Weaponry task force Associated task forces (nations and regions): United States military history task force

Contents 1 MRAP style vehicles in other armys 2 Removed Sisu Raisu 3 Added Orders Section 4 Millions/Billions, the 2008 budget 5 Article should be moved 6 Oct 18 contract awards by USMC 7 First Combat Death?

[edit] MRAP style vehicles in other armys

It might be noteworthy, that other armys field MRAP style vehicles (mine blast resistance, V-shaped hull) for a long time. For example the german Bundeswehr field testet the Dingo since 2000 within it's KFOR peacekeeping mission on the Balkans. Full scale shipping started in 2001. For references see the Dinge article (the german one is more detailed).

German: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATF_Dingo English: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATF_Dingo

[edit] Removed Sisu Raisu

I removed the see also link to Sisu Raisu, as it appears that it has little to do with MRAP style vehicles, and has never been in contention for the contract. It is a mine clearing vehicle, not really a mine protected IFV. If anyone feels strongly about it, post your reasons please. Tmaull 03:55, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Added Orders Section

I added a section to track timeline of the orders of vehicles under the MRAP program as well as orders through other programs of vehicles that have been considered for or linked to the MRAP program. I will be building this section up as I have the time, and any assistance is appreciated. I think each entry should have a date, numbers and types of vehicles ordered, and USD worth of the contract if available.Tmaull 15:51, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Millions/Billions, the 2008 budget

OK, point taken, clearly the $830B of the referenced article is incorrect but that's no reason to assume that the correct amount is $830M. That's less than the '07 budget and is probably not right either. It is more likely that the typo intended an amount c$8B but until we can find a source to verify I think that the reference to the '08 budget sum should be removed. Dino246 13:18, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Sorry for upping crappy data.Tmaull 15:13, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article should be moved

This article really should be swapped with Mine Resistant Ambush Protected. In general, articles should not be at their initialisms; instead, the article should be at the full name and the initialism should redirect to the article. However, I cannot make the move because Mine Resistant Ambush Protected is a redirect with history, so this will have to be handled by an admin. Chromaticity 13:15, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

WP:RM is your friend. --Bobblehead ^(rants) 14:52, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Call me silly, but I thought it best to discuss on the talk page before going to a centralized request forum. Chromaticity 17:35, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Either way you look at it, you'll have to go to WP:RM and file a request. If the move is not uncontroversial you'll need to submit a request in the "Other Proposals" section regardless of there being a pre-existing discussion on this talk page so that the "community at large" can get involved in the discussion. --Bobblehead ^(rants) 17:57, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Tmaull 19:22, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Oct 18 contract awards by USMC

[1] The Marine Corps Systems Command, Quantico, Va., is the contracting activity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.76.0.207 (talk) 14:10, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] First Combat Death?

Althought the NY Times reported that there was a death of a soldier in a new version MRAP, this miliblog quite assertively states that this is not true and that the soldier in question had been in a RG-31. I haven't been able to find any corroborating sources for this. Anyone else?BWH76 (talk) 15:56, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I read that too. The commenter "Tom" is me. Yes people have died in the RG-31. Which is NOT an MRAP according to MNF-I. The US Army had RG31s before the MRAP program existed. He also mentions Buffalo deaths, but I can't find any other evidence to back that up. Tmaull (talk) 22:14, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Force Protection VP Mike Aldrich himself has conceded that soldiers have died in their MRAPs according to these articles: [2] [3]. I gather that the incident last week was the first death in a MaxxPro, although to be fair, the 3 soldiers who were actually inside the vehicle seem to have got off lightly considering the size of the blast. Dino246 (talk) 19:47, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

The RG-31 is part of MRAP. The program isn't just for new vehicles, but also for the uparmoring of existing vehicles in the field. Jrssr5 11:13, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Do you have a source for that info? - Tmaull (talk) 13:42, 20 March 2008 (UTC)