My negative, as my boss’s brother was very sad. He said venting to find out the game we play games together, together fight monster, how to kill on how to kill. Later, we played the GuildWars game, my brother helped me apply a number, and she also bought some GW gold to me. Choose the name, I think a long time, in order to no longer immerse in the lovelorn, so I need to find individuals to love me, want to permanently, I hope that it is no longer the past fireworks fleeting. Finally, I choose love me 9 long time as my name. Brother saw and laughed; he said he hoped I will be happy. He let me go to play, beware of being cheated, do not give other people my phone and QQ.

Posted by: gw gold at August 11, 2008 11:39 PM

I played the Goonzu game for a few months, my heart had too many feelings, and this game is playing what in the end, playing goonzu gold or playing the feelings.

Posted by: goonzu gold at August 11, 2008 11:37 PM

Unwittingly, I now have to play Gaia more than three years, during the six months I have not played, it is because the equipment and gaia gold stolen. I am a hot personality, impulses, its own people, had been a game of the girls to beat. She brought me happy, but also brought troubles to me.

Posted by: gaia gold at August 11, 2008 11:34 PM

I am an ordinary online game enthusiast. January, I walked inside into a new world called RF. In this new world inside, I find the feeling that all games there have never had. I also the first time spent money in the online to buy RF gold. I would like to put the feeling of the article inside, thank all the friends in RF, and wish you happy.

Posted by: rf gold at August 11, 2008 11:32 PM

Yesterday, because I miss you, I go back the game and I want to watch to see. The rohan crone that you give me is also in here. I unexpectedly met you; I think I should stay here because I still think around you. This afternoon, I let you played together me this night, you promised. In the evening I thought you would not have come, but I saw you really come, I really very happy.

Posted by: rohan crone at August 11, 2008 11:30 PM

Three years ago, after friends introduced, I played the Rappelz game. At that time, I dazed and confused, I like to go my own way, I have a lot of rappelz rupees, but I became the most evil villains in the game. Until I encountered her, I found the meaning of survival.

Posted by: rappelz rupees at August 11, 2008 11:27 PM

The friend took me to the game, but she own was leaving the game. A person to game is boring, every day, I only know to upgrade and earn ro zeny. I can not sad dot this mess of feelings and moving. Once, the two boys for me quarreled utterly, until I leaved and tool sad. Later, I found a boy to married, I think perhaps all this to change, and I pray to become a reality, a few days after he disappeared. A person was playing a marriage number, what would it have taken place.

Posted by: ro zeny at August 11, 2008 11:25 PM

Thank my husband, you always very good to me, I had contentment. You took me for such a long time, I am very touched. In order to accompany me, you always not to go to school, so did not pass the examination. In order to accompany me, you do not always upgrade and you own maplestory gold is very least. I know these; you do not say that I also know all.

Posted by: maplestory mesos at August 11, 2008 11:15 PM

Cheap metin2 yang is not simply what.Buy metin2 gold is not what is even more.

Posted by: Cheap metin2 yang at August 5, 2008 11:59 PM

We can also maplestory.io this site to buy, cheap and safe. It was so non-stop the escalation, in order to satisfy their desire to want things, the upgrading of non-stop!

Posted by: maplestory.io at August 5, 2008 11:58 PM

rolex replica watches - $98 swiss , we don't sale replica watches.The Art of E-commerce

Posted by: replica watches at August 3, 2008 10:36 PM

The Humvee was originally designed as a recon and utility vehicle. Once in Bosnia, it was apparent of it's limited tactical use. It just got worse as it was deployed improperly. They were improved. Sure!
But why use a jeep for a truck. A Jeep is a Jeep and a truck is a truck. The Army wants one vehicle to be everything. When a vehicle carries more than it was designed to. It is going to have problems. Tipping over, breaking down, and turning over. So you increase the payload. And all things considered
your back to square one. And the fuel consumption plummets. Humvees were about 60 to 80k originally.
NOW! about 80 to 100k. The armor kit is half the cost. Just some flame cut steel plates and some b.p.glass. Costs as much as the rest of the vehicle. Kinda fishy. Now it rolls over. Especially with a turret. Improper deployment.
Just buy some Cadillac Gage Commandos. Done deal!
Stop using a Humvee for a APC. It's just stupid! And stop trying to prop up GM with war contracts. At the expense of the solders.

Posted by: Steve at July 20, 2008 02:56 PM

after 15 years of working on the HMMV and fixing it all over the world it is judt past its prime and usefulness. they are putting bandaids on a sucking chest wound. every "up-grade" has made the thing more of a nightmare to repair or drive. It was good through the 80's and 90's but we need a vehicle designed with armor from the start not an after thought to bolt on after it gets blown up a few times.

Posted by: sgt slaughter at June 13, 2008 10:03 PM

nice to meet you

Posted by: wowpowerleveling at April 15, 2008 12:52 AM

JLTV, FCS, FTTS. All baloney. These are all programs
to perpetuate the Humvee/AM General production.
Then A unarmored Humvee."Neckbreaker". The Army/Government has some sympathetic notion that GM
has a manifest destiny to own this light vehicle class. The Army does everything it can to ward off anything that might oust GM from this position. GM makes/made a ton of money from the US taxpayer's subsidizing Humvee "assistance sales to allies. And from the parts orders. The Humvee is as politically correct as possible. But as combat incorrect as can be. The Army knew of it's shortcoming's since Bosnia. They drug their feet ever since then. And still do. Anything to protect GM. Gm finally ended up selling that division in the end BAE. Four companies pretty much build everything in the Army Motor pool. BAE, Oshkosh , Freightlinner, General Dynamics. BAE and Freightlinner, both heavily foreign owned.
This generation of TACOM and TARDEC will go down in history as dropping the ball more times than any other in Army wheeled vehicle history.
Loosing two or three people everyday in IRAQ is acceptable in terms of costs verses building the right vehicle in the right state with the right suppliers, just to assure "funding". This whole war is a fiasco. Allmost half of the deaths are vehicle related.IEds, rollovers, accidents, blast
injuries. Most preventable. Viet-nam, WWll,or Afghanistan. The Army seems to forget everything
when they redeploy to a new environment. The whole thing makes me want to puke.......

Posted by: Steve at November 21, 2007 03:46 PM

i like that jeep

Posted by: justin smith at November 12, 2007 06:43 PM

don't waste time with this crap use the stryker that saved my life multiple times from ieds

Posted by: strykerdriver at November 10, 2007 05:33 PM

What was that weird looking tank that had 2 guns & that the Sherman replaced?

Posted by: Roy Smith at October 15, 2007 01:20 PM

To the best of my Knowledge we entered WWII with the M-3 Grant as our main battle tank and the M-2 Stuart as our light tank.I stand to be corrected but the sherman came along in 42 in North Africa.

Posted by: chuck Regnier at October 15, 2007 05:18 AM

To the best of my Knowledge we entered WWII with the M-3 Grant as our main battle tank and the M-2 Stuart as our light tank.I stand to be corrected but the sherman came along in 42 in North Africa.

Posted by: oldAO at October 15, 2007 05:16 AM

The HMMV has never been as dependable as the CUCV's or the Jeep for that matter. They break down too easily, are more difficult to repair and leak fluids from the time they are 2 weeks old. They are, and always have been underpowered. The more armor you add just makes them slower and less agile. It it passed time to replace them. I don't know what the best replacement would be at this time, but it needs to happens soon. The only advantage over the old Chevy 3/4 ton I ever felt in 16+ years of driving HMMVs was their performance in really sloppy mud and going up steep hills. The HMMV is hard on your entire body whether you are driving or riding. Their equipment carrying capacity is less than the old trucks (not by weight,but by cargo area. Our Secret Service AND Blackwater have been using armored Suburbans for a long time. Funny that the DOD has never expressed an interest in them. Realizing that common sense has no place in the military, our civilian leadership should show some to get the process of moving past the HMMV and current small arms ASAP.

Posted by: Phil at October 14, 2007 09:38 PM

Nice looking vehicle as far as armor plating goes at this moment in time there is nothing in the field to defend against and EFP.

Posted by: savageactor7 at October 14, 2007 05:53 AM

Sgt. A Conti,
I hope you meant the M60A3 MBT.The M60A2 had that totally useless 152mm Shellelagh gun/missile system like on the M551 Sheridan.Don't forget the M561 Gama Goat.In 1983,I was in Ft. Irwin.In 1984,I was in the 3rd Infantry Division & got to see the M1A1 Abrams & M2 Bradley.I never saw the HMMWV though,we were stuck with the CUCVs.The HMMWV didn't come until after I left Germany.Also we still had AH-1 Cobras & they were still working the bugs out of the UH-60 Blackhawks(because they were falling out of the sky).I never personally got to see the MLRS.That would have been awesome to watch at Graf.I remember REFORGER in 1984 when we had our Kevlar "Fritz" helmets(that saved a life in Grenada),M1A1 Abrams,& M2 Bradleys & the stateside units that came over still had their steel pots,M60A3s(at least they weren't M60A1s or M48A5s),& M113s.

Posted by: Roy Smith at October 13, 2007 03:53 PM

On Dec. 8th 1941 we entered WW2 with the M4 Sherman tank. The rifle of the day was a bolt action springfield and the new transportation of the day was this thing called the "Jeep". We ended it with the M26 Purshing MBT. The M1 rifle and the Jeep. When I entered the military in 1983 we had the old canvas topped 1/4 Tons, M16A1s and M60A2 MBTs.
War is an evolutionary process. Historically we have never ended a war with the same equipment that we entered it with.
This is a different type of war that needs new tactics and new equipment. The Hummer was designed for the battlefields of Europe not the urban city's of Iraq.
Our troops are the best in the world, we need to make sure they have the best equipment to perform in this new type of war.
You don't fight todays war with yesterdays equipment and tactics.

Posted by: Sgt. A. Conti at October 13, 2007 03:58 AM

That thing looks awesome! They should put a turret on it with an auto-grenade launcher and a machine gun or two while they're at it.

Posted by: Ted at October 12, 2007 07:56 PM

That the Humvee is being asked to performa duty in Iraq it was not designed for doesn't mean it needs to be replaced.

If the complaint is that todays technology is more advanced than that of 20 years ago, well, introduce Hummer Block B with some upgrades (although it's dubious as to whether those marginal performance gains would justify the cost).

If the complaint is that the vehicle is not armored sufficiently for today's IED environment, well, that what they designed the Stryker and the Bradley for.

But the notion that a utility vehicle should weigh 8 tons is both ridiculous and a horrendous waste of limited resources.

Posted by: John at October 12, 2007 04:36 PM

Does it beat the old Komatsu LAV circa 2004?

See

http://www66.tok2.com/home2/tankguy/jgsdf03/keisoukou.html

Posted by: Peter Brown at October 12, 2007 02:54 PM

REPLACE the HMV ? MAJOR dollar process. Which means that when they ARE replaced the Reserves and especially National Guard units will ge stuck with all the surplus future obsolete HMVs for decades.
Composite materials, alloy chassis, lighter & stronger more fuel efficient power plants with blast proof undercarriages is a tall order. 7.62mm bullet proof shell & glass, good 360 degree visability with a decent profile and access to return fire from doors AND a hatch to mount crew served weapons BETTER than the current vehicle all demand a lot from manufacturers and that process of R & D is going to take some time from all the lessons learned in Iraq &AFGN.
The DoD procurement system is an antiquated post-WW2 bureaucracy that is in dire need of a 21st Century overhaul. Just like the HMV.

Posted by: SSG Yankee Medic at October 12, 2007 02:03 PM

The press release begs off the question of survivability as classified. But, in this case, survivability is the whole story.

Survivability (admittedly in a mission it wasn't built to carry out) is the primary problem with the Humvee. Unless you know something about how survivable this critter is, there is no way to evaluate its quality.

Looks cool is great, but an invincible image hasn't stopped insurgent from going after far more robust military hardware.

Posted by: ohwilleke at October 12, 2007 10:51 AM

Christian,

Nice find! You guys do good work-keep it up...

Posted by: Solomon at October 11, 2007 07:55 PM

Johnathan - The US isn't loosing the war in Iraq, the tide started turning a couple months back, its been getting better over there ever since. (try getting your news from someone other then CNN).

as for the topic, You cant reallya call this vehicle "light", howeever th days of military vehicles being light are over. these days every vehicle needs armor on it....which makes the weight skyrocket...if ya go with more armor you need a big heavy chasis to support the weight, and a beefy'er suspension, as well as engine the the turtle can move.

I think that this concept is pretty good, but I think that if you are going to make a humvee replacement, you need to make some things the same, like the back portion of it.....since their are so so many things these days made just for the humvee. but things like armor have t be standard, as well as a V shaped hull for the bottom of it.

Posted by: murc at October 11, 2007 06:37 PM

There's an article on the Ares blog over at Aviation Week about a potential alternative, the BAe SRATS vehicle:

http://preview.tinyurl.com/yowa95

Less armor, but better offroad performance and agility. Don't know if that'll work for MOUT, but there it is.

There's an even more interesting article on a new engine, a two cylinder, two stroke diesel rated at 325 hp:

http://preview.tinyurl.com/2xjqbn

They're going to test it in the FMTV series. If it proves out, it may be scalable to other systems. You can stack them to make a 4 or 6 cylinder system (running 650 and 975 hp, respectively), or pull it out of a ground vehicle, and put it in a UAV.

Maybe. If it proves out, we might think about designing vehicles around the different engine combinations.

Posted by: demophilus at October 11, 2007 06:25 PM

well as far as ww2 generation.....my grandfather was 5'9......im 6'1 so um we are just a little bigger plus they also have alot more equipment to

Posted by: james at October 11, 2007 06:24 PM

Gee, the generation of today must have such large fat asses that they can't fit into a vehicle the same size as the WW2 Jeep.

Posted by: Gary at October 11, 2007 06:02 PM

How can they even start to call this a 'light' vehicle. It weighs 8 tons, the same wieght as an M113 APC. 8x the weight of a jeep!. Its looks hide the fact that it is as big as a truck. No wonder the US is loosing the war in Iraq, it has lost all perspective , even of size.

Posted by: Johnathan at October 11, 2007 05:43 PM

Whatever they do, they need to do a better job of design for C3 equipment in all future vehicles.

Posted by: Dale at October 11, 2007 03:39 PM

you could compare the hummvv with the navies obsesion with multi tasking hummvvs where designed to work in the open battlefeilds of eourupe and russia, not in the iraqi cities

same thing with the navies new ships im sorry but if im in the ocean i like to think my ship has better armor than a bradly and isnt just OK at a few things id want it to be good at its job

i think we should keep humvvs for a little while but think about a replacement

keep the mraps for cities but luv for rural and rough areas

just my two cents

Posted by: James at October 11, 2007 03:31 PM

LUV: longer, wider, higher, much heavier and certainly much more expensive ...

Why accept all these negatives when the humvee can do the task?

Posted by: b at October 11, 2007 03:01 PM

I don't see why we would be so excited about replacing the HMMWV? They are great for what they where designed for. What we need is a light wheeled armored system that we can use for partols but replacing the HMMWV is a little on the silly side unless we can demonstrate a need for light un-armored wheeled systems in the field. (Finding uses for the HMMWV unarmored seems to get harder and harder all the time)

Posted by: The Cenobyte at October 11, 2007 02:23 PM

Am I missing how this LUV is a quantum leap over the current technology? Compare it to the Turkish Otokar Cobra (which we should just build ourselves to augment the current HMMWV fleet). The LUV has only comparable performance in most areas (speed & mobility, for example) at the expense of being incompatible with the current HMMWV fleet (unlike the Cobra, which uses the HMMWV chassis). It's also bigger, heavier, and carries considerably fewer men than the Cobra.

Posted by: Logan Hartke at October 11, 2007 02:17 PM

It seems ideally we could keep many of the unarmored HMMWVs around with the light units especially the 82nd and 101st; while having the heavy units replace their HMMWVs with MRAPs. Use the heavy units in urban or "hot" areas and the light units in the open areas or along the borders. Just some thoughts but why not use the vehicle that fits what the need is.

Posted by: Jeff at October 11, 2007 02:04 PM

I agree with a need for change.To me it just seems like the HMMWV is too big for air drop & especially being transported by helicopter.Maybe in a motorized situation like the old 9th Motorized Infantry Division was designed for OUT OF an urban environment,yes the HMMWV is ideal.But,today the HMMWV is operating out of its element,at least in Iraq.I don't hear of it having problems much in Afghanistan.Also,I think using MATTRACKS treads gives it an advantage in mountainous & winter environment,but I guess MATTRACKS would have no effect or impact,positive or negative,in Iraq urban environments.I still think HMMWVs with MATTRACKS look cool though.Off topic,why can't our armed forces find a viable use for Bv206s,especially as an Airmobile Mechanized option for the 82nd & 101st Airborne Divisions?

Posted by: Roy Smith at October 11, 2007 01:37 PM

Roy,

To me, it's not so much an issue of "old"...it's just that vehicle design, suspension, power, armor, armament, etc. has come so far in 20 years, I think it's worth rethinking the Humvee.

The Humvee is a great vehicle - believe me I've seen it do some amazing things - and it's been very adaptable given the threats in Iraq for which it was not designed. But with all the advances in vehicle design these days, it's time for a replacement.

Posted by: Christian Lowe at October 11, 2007 12:48 PM

I remember back in the 80's in Germany when the medical company I was with was driving the old GM CUCVs & our ambulances were the even older Dodge CUCVs.We were waiting for the "new" HMMWVs to come in.They didn't show up until after I left Germany.Its strange from that point of view to think of HMMWVs as old.I guess they are just too big for certain missions & too light & unarmored for others.

Posted by: Roy Smith at October 11, 2007 11:58 AM

How about the Flyer Defense Internally Transportable Light Strike Vehicle? This vehicle sort of reminds me of the ITV by Flyer Defense.The LUV looks interesting,what weapons,like anti-tank missiles,can it carry? Looking at all of these proposed "future" weapons & vehicles is like looking at the old Sears Christmas Catalog,the toys looked pretty cool,but you knew that the catalog pictures were the closest you'd ever get to them.

Posted by: Roy Smith at October 11, 2007 11:52 AM