Meet the GM Defense ISV Army Truck

[OldSolduer]

Per capita that's pretty shit.

Hypothermia is shitty and I suspect many of you know that already. Its ok to be wet, and ok to be cold.

Cold and wet is a recipe for disaster.

 

[FJAG]

Coming back to this one just because - dog with a bone.

The old Prairie line "It's a dry cold!" has a deal of truth in it.

I can confirm that. After around 30 years in Manitoba and 15 years in SW Ontario I can attest that there is definitely a difference between "wet" and "dry" cold. Same-same for the difference between winter exercises in Shilo versus Petawawa.

Latvia and the Baltics are as damp and dreich as Britain but also colder.

More Brits die of hypothermia than Canadians (even adjusted per capita) because damp woolies leach the heat out of you faster than dry thinsulate.

If I understand the UK statistics properly, the problem is almost entirely related to very old people who actually die within their unheated homes. We don't seem to have the same problem with centuries old buildings with no insulation, a high energy cost and a large elderly, infirm population living by themselves in these conditions.

If ISV and Latvia then SOCEM better be real good.

I found mine to be pretty good many decades ago. It's gotten a lot better since then.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the purpose of the ISV is simply to get troops from barracks to the front with their kit, rapidly and in good shape.

Well, in part, but also tactical mobility once there. There's always been a difference between how we gunners did thing - essentially except for those heliborne winter exercises, we're tied pretty closely to our vehicles regardless of the season - and the infantry - who basically once they get to their destination, leave their vehicles away in a Zulu harbour and their troops spread out tactically. I'm not sure how true that holds for the LAVs, but with the 3/4 and 5/4s and even with the M113s, they were rarely to be seen except when on the move. Companies were more likely to have warming tents (or I guess in Ukraine warming bunkers) rather than vehicles with the heaters running.

I'm not trying to defend the IFV as against any other type of vehicle, I'm just saying that it shouldn't be criticized on the basis that it doesn't offer some specific creature comforts. It's clearly a vehicle that offers motorized transport on most terrain in Latvia and an ability to carry that massive amount of kit that seems to have become the burden of the infantry, and does very little beyond that. To me that's already a lot. Now if its durability and ease of maintenance is confirmed then the grunts have got themselves a winner.

 

[OldSolduer]

I'm not trying to defend the IFV as against any other type of vehicle, I'm just saying that it shouldn't be criticized on the basis that it doesn't offer some specific creature comforts. It's clearly a vehicle that offers motorized transport on most terrain in Latvia and an ability to carry that massive amount of kit that seems to have become the burden of the infantry, and does very little beyond that. To me that's already a lot. Now if its durability and ease of maintenance is confirmed then the grunts have got themselves a winner.

Therein lies part of the problem. The kit.

Who decides on what is Mission Essential Kit and what is not? Ammo, rats, water to start.

 

[Kirkhill]

Sorry for the delay in getting back to you guys.

Apparently, weighing a couple of hours of Haley Reinhart against a couple of hours of you lot, Haley wins. Go figure.

Can you provide a link to your statistics? I'm not disputing your figures (yet?), but making a connection between the potential for cold (and heat) casualties based on "damp woolies" and using it as argument for enclosed and heated tactical vehicles in a temperate climate can lead to m/s injuries due to stretching. If you dived deeper (I haven't yet), you might find that many of those excess winter deaths (EWD) were secondary to hypothermia and mainly in the elderly and frail. You may also find that the "exposure to the cold" that leads to some of those deaths was in their homes not outside.

Both heat and cold increase risk of death in England and Wales but rates vary across geographical areas and population groups | LSHTM

Each year in England and Wales, there were on average nearly 800 excess deaths associated with heat and over 60,500 associated with cold between 2000 and 2019, according to a new study published in The Lancet Planetary Health.

www.lshtm.ac.uk

The link

[Hypothermia] - PubMed

Hypothermia is defined as a core body temperature less than 35 degrees C (95 degrees F) and results from prolonged exposure to cold environment, drugs, and underlying pathologic conditions. Hypothermia is associated with marked depression of cerebral blood flow and oxygen requirement, reduced...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

And yes there are other factors - like 300 year old houses with coal fireplaces, rising damp, aging populations and being deserted by snooty pigs after joining them in the gutter.

I can confirm that. After around 30 years in Manitoba and 15 years in SW Ontario I can attest that there is definitely a difference between "wet" and "dry" cold. Same-same for the difference between winter exercises in Shilo versus Petawawa.

If I understand the UK statistics properly, the problem is almost entirely related to very old people who actually die within their unheated homes. We don't seem to have the same problem with centuries old buildings with no insulation, a high energy cost and a large elderly, infirm population living by themselves in these conditions.

I found mine to be pretty good many decades ago. It's gotten a lot better since then.

Well, in part, but also tactical mobility once there. There's always been a difference between how we gunners did thing - essentially except for those heliborne winter exercises, we're tied pretty closely to our vehicles regardless of the season - and the infantry - who basically once they get to their destination, leave their vehicles away in a Zulu harbour and their troops spread out tactically. I'm not sure how true that holds for the LAVs, but with the 3/4 and 5/4s and even with the M113s, they were rarely to be seen except when on the move. Companies were more likely to have warming tents (or I guess in Ukraine warming bunkers) rather than vehicles with the heaters running.

I'm not trying to defend the IFV as against any other type of vehicle, I'm just saying that it shouldn't be criticized on the basis that it doesn't offer some specific creature comforts. It's clearly a vehicle that offers motorized transport on most terrain in Latvia and an ability to carry that massive amount of kit that seems to have become the burden of the infantry, and does very little beyond that. To me that's already a lot. Now if its durability and ease of maintenance is confirmed then the grunts have got themselves a winner.

As to the choice of vehicles -

Land Rover covered a multitude of sins - recce, CP, staff, gun tractor, "snatch".

 

[Kirkhill]

GM Versions




One basic vehicle with lots of modifications - largely built on a civilian production line.

...

And why would one choose to be cold, wet and miserable when conducting a road march from Shilo to Wainwright?

 

[FJAG]

Land Rover covered a multitude of sins - recce, CP, staff, gun tractor, "snatch".

I've always like this Aussie one.

 

[KevinB]

View attachment 86878View attachment 86879View attachment 86880

For the price you are paying for the ISVs why not just by these - and stay warm and dry?

Because they aren’t designed for significant off road usage. The curb weight on a Suburban is huge - and realistically it’s a 6 pax vehicle with kit (and it gets cramped with full kit).

I have a Z71 Burb, with the 6.2 V-8, it’s a great vehicle for moving stuff on roads, but I can tell you trying to follow an ISV or the JLTV on range roads, or off road and it doesn’t do nearly as well.

The Suburban isn’t the same frame as the Colorado or 1500 series trucks either.

The JLTV is massive but it’s got ground clearance up the ass, and armor - its a good vehicle for a light fire support vehicle- but it’s a 4 person vehicle, not 6 or 10 (okay you can stick a few folks on the exposed areas if needed - but it kind of defeats the purpose at the point.

The ISV can do what it can since it’s stripped down to next to nothing - which means you have the ability to sling it from a Blackhawk - for a CA aspect that isn’t exactly helpful though as the Griffon would shit its transmission out the roof if it tried to do that.