| Submit your comments on this article |
| Afghanistan |
| McCurdy's Armor System Going To Afghanistan |
| 2010-02-11 |
| Those of you landing in Afghanistan in coming months may not have to engage in the sandbag stacking and trench digging usually associated with lowly grunt-dom. An $800,000 investment in an armored wall system known as McCurdy's Armor could have Marines rapidly erecting 6.5-foot-tall mortar-, RPG- and bullet proof fortresses in less than an hour, saving the days it can take to fortify an area by conventional means and making forward-operating units more nimble. Named for Ryan S. McCurdy—a Marine killed in Iraq in 2006 while hauling a wounded comrade to safety—the system is designed to offer troops increased protection and mobility when setting up outposts in hostile areas. The walls can be ferried into place in panels that are easily stackable in a truck or trailer. Once in position, four Marines can assemble a single panel in less than ten minutes without any special tools or additional equipment. The panels then snap together like bomb-proofed Legos secured with steel pins to form a blast- and bullet-proof shelter. The armor can be set up in a variety of arrangements (U-shaped, J-shaped, etc.), and in instances where troops are worried about armor piercing rounds a second layer of armor can supplement the structures. But the walls aren't just a protective cocoon for far-flung outposts; ballistic windows offer protection while giving Marines a line of sight and the ability to fire downrange, meaning McCurdy's Armor can be deployed as both a defensive stronghold as well as a tactical firing position. When it's time to pull up camp, Marines can quickly break down their ersatz stockade, stack it back in their vehicles and move on to fortify the next position without leaving a single thing behind. Just try pulling that off with sandbags. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose |
| #9 Breachers for roads, insta-forts..yup. |
| Posted by: swksvolFF 2010-02-11 19:02 |
| #8 Yep LOTP, that's exactly what I was thinking about. Good find. |
| Posted by: Redneck Jim 2010-02-11 18:01 |
| #7 Why am I thinking Roman Legion camp? |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2010-02-11 16:05 |
| #6 If you're referring to these, I don't think they ever got into the standard equipment inventory, although I could be wrong. In any case, what is wanted these days IIUC are ways to protect small FOBs rather than to dig foxholds. Clear, hold, build ... |
| Posted by: lotp 2010-02-11 15:55 |
| #5 In the 60's I remember reading about a "Foxhole Digger", sorta a mortar shell directed down, blew a nice foxhole in a few seconds, Isn't it still available? |
| Posted by: Redneck Jim 2010-02-11 13:18 |
| #4 texhooey, I'm told by by colleagues who are uniformed that the ground in Afghanistan isn't as receptive to an entrenching tool as that of France was in WWI. Force protection for forward-deployed troops is a priority I would support and one that will serve well, I suspect, if we find ourselves in operations other than force-on-force battles with nation states elsewhere in the world. |
| Posted by: lotp 2010-02-11 07:08 |
| #3 Just a sfor many military projects (or as the navigation system discused a couple days ago) Obama will find it too expensive all while giving billions to Acorn and digging a trillion dollar deficit. |
| Posted by: JFM 2010-02-11 06:32 |
| #2 Sounds like BS. I know there are a lot of grunts that wouldn't mind having their own shovel/implement and dig their own little holes and watch the frag fly over their heads. |
| Posted by: texhooey 2010-02-11 00:53 |
| #1 Those are some heavy-looking legos there. |
| Posted by: gorb 2010-02-11 00:30 |