The Cost of a Soldier

[dragoon500ly]

This came out on a recent edition of the Army Times, how much it costs to outfit a modern infantryman:

PVS-14 Monocular Night Vision Device: $3,500.00
Advanced Combat Helmet: $235.00
Helmet Cover, Army Combat Helmet, Universal OCP: $15.27
Ballistic protective eyewear, clear & gray lenses: $38.00
Army Combat Shirt: $101.19
Name tags, unit patches and rank patch: $14.75
Reverse-field US flag replica: $6.45
Ballistic Neck Protection Pad-Nape: $29.00
Close Quarter Combat Multi-Magazine Holder: $28.00
Soldier Plate Carrier System: $355.00
Set of Enhanced Small Arms Protective Inserts: $1,200.00
Infrared Multi-Function Aiming Light: $1,467.00
M-4 Carbine: $ 1,300.00
Trouser, Fire Resistant, Army COmbat Uniform: $66.17
Knee pads, universal: $29.45
Combat Boots, pair: $168.00
M-4 Improved Buttstock: $294.00
Elbow Pads, Universal Set: $29.45
M-68 Close Combat Optic: $389.00
Combat gloves: $31.40
Enhanced Side Ballistic Insert (set): $742.00
7 5.56mm 30-round magazines: $77.00
MOLLE Rifleman Set, including assault pack, waist pack, hydration system, 3 double magazine pouches, 2 canteen pouches, 2 hand grenade pouches, triple magazine pouch, entrenching tool carrier, flash bang grenade pouch and tactical assault panel: $242.00
MOLLE Field Pack, Large: $220.00
PAS-13(V)1 Light Weight Thermal Sight: $7,100.00
Close Quarter Combat Three-Point Sling: $10.00
Improved First Aid Kit: $66.64
Infrared strobe, small: $18.01
Strap Cutter: $15.00
Weapon light: $300.21

Grand Total: $18,087.99

Wow!

[copeab]

I think a lot can be read into 2/3 the money going to night vision gear.

[dragoon500ly]

Yup! It's been said that the US Army fights better at night than during the day.

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

Yup! It's been said that the US Army fights better at night than during the day.

We used to say that even back when I was in in the 82nd -- "We own the night." And we didn't have as many NODs as they have now.

[Abbott Shaull]

Yeah and where were the elbow and knee pads back in the day...lol Let alone the body armor or the optics. Also back then Molle gear was still in the testing phase. Special Forces, Rangers, 1st Cavalry and other selected units were testing it. We still had the old Y and H harness.

[Rockwolf66]

very impressive list.

Mind if i post it on another forum?

[HorseSoldier]

The unfortunate part is that a portion of that stuff is actually junk that any Joe who's serious about kit and functionality has to replace out of their own pocket because the procurement dolts strike out again and again on the best tool for the job.

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by Rockwolf66

very impressive list.

Mind if i post it on another forum?

Not a problem, the source is the 28 February 2011 issue of the Army Times.

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by Abbott Shaull

Yeah and where were the elbow and knee pads back in the day...lol Let alone the body armor or the optics. Also back then Molle gear was still in the testing phase. Special Forces, Rangers, 1st Cavalry and other selected units were testing it. We still had the old Y and H harness.

Started out with ALICE, then came the LLBLV, the Ranger Vests, those knock offs of Israeli webbing, MOLLE was just coming into service when I medicaled out...And 30 years later, still have 3 duffel bags of TA-50 that have seen more use camping and hunting!

Elbow and kee pads...I still shake my head over those. Didn't have it in the day, didn't need it. Men were Men and Real Men Drank the Blood of Their Enemies in Lou of Lifer Juice!!!!

[dragoon500ly]

Here are some of the latest items from the 2011 Military Budget:

$733 million for the purchase of 100 Stryker NBC-Recon variants...got to get ride of the M-93! Not Purchased Here! Has it occurred to anyone else, that like cockroaches, Strykers are breeding faster than they can be killed off?

$14 million for the midlife service extension program for the Stinger MANPADs.

$884 million for the Ground Combat Vehicle, this is the replacement vehicle for the M-113.

$1.4 billion for the CH-47F, purchase of 47 ac.

$1.5 billion for the UH-60M, purchase of 71 ac.

An item of intrest is the decision to purchase 9,212 AN/PPS-26 Detectors. These are designed to detect a human target through up to 8 inches of abode walls or other barriers. Scale of issue is to be one per rifle squad. Hmmmm.

The Army is also planning to spend several millions in R&D to develop a new series of ultra-lightweight rechargable batteries...

[Abbott Shaull]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

Here are some of the latest items from the 2011 Military Budget:

$733 million for the purchase of 100 Stryker NBC-Recon variants...got to get ride of the M-93! Not Purchased Here! Has it occurred to anyone else, that like cockroaches, Strykers are breeding faster than they can be killed off?

$884 million for the Ground Combat Vehicle, this is the replacement vehicle for the M-113.

$1.4 billion for the CH-47F, purchase of 47 ac.

The Army is also planning to spend several millions in R&D to develop a new series of ultra-lightweight rechargable batteries...

Gee they still making CH-47 thought production was done.

Replacing the M-113 don't think this will happen in our lifetime. One of those things when you build a purpose.

Uhm... Stryker seems to be only the contender in the last 50 years that can replace the M-113 series of family.

Wow they need these batteries since when and they have had the technology to research it since when, and they are now only looking for it to be developed.

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by Abbott Shaull

Gee they still making CH-47 thought production was done.

These are supposed to be the first totally new Chinook air frames for the US Army in 20 years....

Replacing the M-113 don't think this will happen in our lifetime. One of those things when you build a purpose.

Who would ever have thought that this day would come. Almost 45 years of M-113 service; almost as good as the ole Sherman!

Wow they need these batteries since when and they have had the technology to research it since when, and they are now only looking for it to be developed.

We've needed lightweight, rechargable batteries for several dozen years now. Guess it took $2.5 million and a year for some thinktank on the ole Parkway to decide that lightweight, rechargable batteries may be a good idea.

[Panther Al]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

$884 million for the Ground Combat Vehicle, this is the replacement vehicle for the M-113.

$1.4 billion for the CH-47F, purchase of 47 ac.

$1.5 billion for the UH-60M, purchase of 71 ac.

OK, Question one: Do they have a replacement lined up, or is this research into finding one for the M113?
Question two: Does this mean the old adage of if it doens't leak, don't fly in it, will no longer be a indicator of the safety of the Sh!thook?
And three, So... these won't get the name of CrashHawk one hopes?

[HorseSoldier]

Research on.

The Ground Combat Vehicle program replaced the Future Combat System program, with a replacement for the M113 being its first milestone goal. They haven't got to the prototype stage yet.

[Legbreaker]

Note that lighter, more powerful batteries have been a goal world wide in all fields for, well, forever.
It's not that simple though. You can't just spend a few billion dollars and 3.63 years later have a battery the size of a pocket watch to run your entire house with.
There has been significant improvements though - look at mobile phones (cellulars for those Americans amongst us). 20 years ago you had to carry around a battery pack the size of two house bricks (and twice as heavy) which lasted barely half the day. Now it's quite easy to loose the entire phone in your pocket and the battery can last days.

[Panther Al]

Originally Posted by HorseSoldier

Research on.

The Ground Combat Vehicle program replaced the Future Combat System program, with a replacement for the M113 being its first milestone goal. They haven't got to the prototype stage yet.

So basically they want to replace the armoured box on tracks with a new armoured box on tracks for those uses that need tracks and armour, but not a turret with a gun. And they need all that money to figure out how to best build a metal box on tracks?

Gah.

OK, Off the shelf time: BAE has an Armoured Box version of the CV90 out there, development costs are already done, as well as factory setup, since its basically a turret-less CV90. Don't know what the unit cost is, but it can't be all that much. And BAE already builds the M2, so a - granted not serious - argument against the NIH syndrome.

http://www.baesystems.com/Sites/Prod...illo/index.htm
http://www.baesystems.com/Sites/Prod...tion/index.htm

[HorseSoldier]

The NIH syndrome, while definitely real, is kind of ridiculous in my opinion, since if we adopted a foreign system it's still going to be made here in the US if they decide to go ahead with full fielding. (Hence the FN and Beretta factories here in the US.) Even if we're importing a design from where ever, American workers will still be making it.

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by HorseSoldier

Even if we're importing a design from where ever, American workers will still be making it.

As a rule of thumb I'd agree with you, however I'm sure there's some items made offshore and shipped in.

I can understand wanting to be self sufficient with regards to war material, however I'm in complete agreement that using a design from elsewhere doesn't do a lot to reduce this self sufficiency. Politics, corporate lobbying/kickbacks, and nepotism appears to be the driving force behind a lot of spending decisions - at least from an outsiders point of view.

[Abbott Shaull]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

We've needed lightweight, rechargable batteries for several dozen years now. Guess it took $2.5 million and a year for some thinktank on the ole Parkway to decide that lightweight, rechargable batteries may be a good idea.

There were troops from the 3rd Mechanized Division who could of saved them 2.5 Million with same conclusion back in 2003.

[Abbott Shaull]

Originally Posted by HorseSoldier

The NIH syndrome, while definitely real, is kind of ridiculous in my opinion, since if we adopted a foreign system it's still going to be made here in the US if they decide to go ahead with full fielding. (Hence the FN and Beretta factories here in the US.) Even if we're importing a design from where ever, American workers will still be making it.

That and we have lost lot of the technology base that we once had, so much for outsourcing and the great work it has done to make us poorer nation.

[Abbott Shaull]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

As a rule of thumb I'd agree with you, however I'm sure there's some items made offshore and shipped in.

I can understand wanting to be self sufficient with regards to war material, however I'm in complete agreement that using a design from elsewhere doesn't do a lot to reduce this self sufficiency. Politics, corporate lobbying/kickbacks, and nepotism appears to be the driving force behind a lot of spending decisions - at least from an outsiders point of view.

Seems true no matter where you at. Here in the US, UK, Germany, France, Russia and other nation that is in the arms industry.

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by Panther Al

OK, Question one: Do they have a replacement lined up, or is this research into finding one for the M113?
Question two: Does this mean the old adage of if it doens't leak, don't fly in it, will no longer be a indicator of the safety of the Sh!thook?
And three, So... these won't get the name of CrashHawk one hopes?

According to the article, they actually got rid of one of the three emergency flight backups....just think! A Chinook without leaks...think of all the savings since the crew chiefs will no longer need to carry a case of hydralic juice on every flight!

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by Abbott Shaull

There were troops from the 3rd Mechanized Division who could of saved them 2.5 Million with same conclusion back in 2003.

But they were ground pounders! Everyone knows that the PBI can't reason things out! It takes some PhD living in a think tank in Washington DC at least a year and several million dollars to decide:

that batteries should be lightweight and rechargable

that the spoon in MREs should have a handle three inches longer

that the latrines should be located downstream so that the coffee doesn't have a funny aftertaste

that instead of having one standard camouflage uniform that each service branch should have its own colors

that our troops really do need improved armor.....

[HorseSoldier]

that instead of having one standard camouflage uniform that each service branch should have its own colors

The service chiefs who started agitating for "branding" and unique uniforms should be retroactively dishonorably discharged, starting with the USMC 4 star who decided to copyright MARPAT (after ripping it off from the Canadians) and working on down through anyone in the chain who approved the Army Clown Uniform and the retarded USAF and USN uniforms since adopted. Completely ridiculous and childish actions on all their parts, and a complete squandering of taxpayer money.

[Abbott Shaull]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

But they were ground pounders! Everyone knows that the PBI can't reason things out! It takes some PhD living in a think tank in Washington DC at least a year and several million dollars to decide:

that batteries should be lightweight and rechargable

that the spoon in MREs should have a handle three inches longer

that the latrines should be located downstream so that the coffee doesn't have a funny aftertaste

that instead of having one standard camouflage uniform that each service branch should have its own colors

that our troops really do need improved armor.....

Okay again ask anyone from the 3rd Mechanized Division or the Marines fighting their way to Baghdad.

Ask anyone who eaten MRE with the short spoon with the deep pouches of food...lol

Of course, for lord knows it was more cost effective the way it use be when everyone purchase the woodland and desert cammies... We can't have that, have to spend the extra money so we can prove we need it next year..lol...

Uhm...Common sense and some common knowledge that science has proved in the last few 100 years would prove that without paying a PhD to tell the military this.

Uhm...Yeah there are people who could tell you this, but a lot of training and other things.

[bobcat]

Originally Posted by HorseSoldier

The service chiefs who started agitating for "branding" and unique uniforms should be retroactively dishonorably discharged, starting with the USMC 4 star who decided to copyright MARPAT (after ripping it off from the Canadians) and working on down through anyone in the chain who approved the Army Clown Uniform and the retarded USAF and USN uniforms since adopted. Completely ridiculous and childish actions on all their parts, and a complete squandering of taxpayer money.

the navy uniform is the only one of the bunch that doesn't make me wanna burst into laughter. its actually designed for where they re supposed to fight(ie the ocean) granted i would assume that if you fell into the ocean you'd rather have someone able to find you to fish you out but thats just me.

[Abbott Shaull]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

According to the article, they actually got rid of one of the three emergency flight backups....just think! A Chinook without leaks...think of all the savings since the crew chiefs will no longer need to carry a case of hydralic juice on every flight!

Yeah but when the old ones you knew you were in trouble when it stop leaking...lol Now with the new ones will it mean they would be in more trouble when it starts.

[Abbott Shaull]

Originally Posted by HorseSoldier

The service chiefs who started agitating for "branding" and unique uniforms should be retroactively dishonorably discharged, starting with the USMC 4 star who decided to copyright MARPAT (after ripping it off from the Canadians) and working on down through anyone in the chain who approved the Army Clown Uniform and the retarded USAF and USN uniforms since adopted. Completely ridiculous and childish actions on all their parts, and a complete squandering of taxpayer money.

I know especially since Inter-Service childishness isn't suppose to exist. Just ask those who created the laws and frameworks for such things Central Command on other Unified Field Commands. They all have to play nice with each other.

Now with all of the separate uniforms think of the confusion one could find themselves in. Last I looked the US Marine Corps still relied on the Navy for several MOS. What if they went to field with the Marines in the Marine uniform and the Naval personnel went in the Naval...uhm wait a minute at least you would know who the trigger pullers were... Oh wait... Or the Special Operation Air Force Forward Observers that they like to attach to Army Special Forces ODAs operating behind enemy lines. Oh again one would know who the green beanies were...

[dragoon500ly]

Ahhh the US Military! It seems that we spend so much time in-fighting and trying to out-do the other service branch that it is almost a miracle that we all come together and beat the shit out of some other enemy...or is more along the lines of someone sticking their nose into our inter-service squabbles?

ANybody remember the fun and games that took place when the Air Farce stripped fix-wing aircraft from the Army back in the early '50s? And how upset the Air Force was when the Army found the loophole that allowed them to field aircraft like the Caribou? Or how the Air Force howled when Congress forced them to buy more A-10s instead of F-16s...and how quickly the Warthogs were sent into the Reserves. Not to mention the maneuvers that took place when the Navy thought that they would have to use F-111s onboard their precious carriers.

[Abbott Shaull]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

Ahhh the US Military! It seems that we spend so much time in-fighting and trying to out-do the other service branch that it is almost a miracle that we all come together and beat the shit out of some other enemy...or is more along the lines of someone sticking their nose into our inter-service squabbles?

ANybody remember the fun and games that took place when the Air Farce stripped fix-wing aircraft from the Army back in the early '50s? And how upset the Air Force was when the Army found the loophole that allowed them to field aircraft like the Caribou? Or how the Air Force howled when Congress forced them to buy more A-10s instead of F-16s...and how quickly the Warthogs were sent into the Reserves. Not to mention the maneuvers that took place when the Navy thought that they would have to use F-111s onboard their precious carriers.

Yeah it still a miracle that Joint Fighter is still in development with the Air Force and the Navy/Marie Air going their own ways.

You forgot to mention about how the other services also 'adopted' M-16 or various versions of the AR-15 only after to take the bitter pill much like US forced the round onto NATO to only change to another version than the one the US Army had pick in return.