Agency makes high-tech push to improve military vehicles
WASHINGTON — When terrorists began laying improvised explosive devices by the dozen in Iraq to kill U.S. troops in 2004, no immediate answer was available. Soldiers and Marines responded by hanging any kind of scrap metal they could find to better protect their Humvees. But “Hillbilly armor,” as the troops sometimes called it, weighed the vehicles down, made them prone to rollovers and still didn't cover the bottom sides of the vehicle most exposed to a blast.
The Pentagon's fight to keep the weight down on vehicles has never really ended. To fight off IEDs, it eventually fielded MRAPs, short for Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles. The beefy trucks have an armored V-shaped hull that deflects roadside blasts, and are credited with saving thousands of lives in Iraq and Afghanistan. But even the smallest ones still weigh in excess of 25,000 pounds, and are prone to rollovers that kill troops.
With all that in mind, a Pentagon agency has begun a new, high-tech effort to protect troops while reducing armor. The Ground X-Vehicle Technology Program is investigating options available to improve both the mobility of military vehicles and the safety for troops inside. The goals of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency appear to be a tall order.
DARPA says that some ways to reach those goals could include “radically enhanced mobility,” figuring out ways to autonomously dodge threats and re-position armor, and improving situational awareness for troops inside the vehicle. The agency also wants to explore making it more difficult for adversaries to see and hear the vehicle.
Despite the program's futuristic goals, DARPA says it plans to develop technology for the program over two years after initial contracts are awarded around April 2015.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Despite sunny forecast, South Carolina ordeal far from over
- Top general in Afghanistan: U.S. strike on hospital a mistake
- Hillary Clinton kept in touch with key donors, emails show
- Survivor: Oregon college gunman spared 1 to give police a message
- Benghazi transcript on way, defying GOP leaders on committee
- Coast Guard believes El Faro container ship sank
- Publisher apologizes for textbook calling slaves ‘workers’
- Supreme Court won’t hear insider trading case
- Passenger train derails in Vermont; 7 injured
- Federal watchdog renews investigation of Secret Service leak
- Allies reach Pacific Rim trade deal likely to divide political parties