Army shuns system to combat RPGs
Experts agree it might help save lives, so why isn’t it in the field?

WASHINGTON - Rocket-propelled grenades, or RPGs, are a favorite weapon of insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan. They are cheap, easy to use and deadly.

RPGs have killed nearly 40 Americans in Afghanistan and more than 130 in Iraq, including 21-year-old Pvt. Dennis Miller.

“They were in Ramadi, and his tank was hit with a rocket-propelled grenade,” says Miller’s mother, Kathy. “Little Denny never knew what hit him.”

More at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14686871/

interesting... but how the hell does it work? They just show the rockets 'magically' blowing up.

From Wikipedia: "TROPHY (in Hebrew: "מעיל רוח", lit. "Wind Coat") is a protective shield system for both light and heavy armored vehicles that intercepts and destroys missiles and rockets with a shotgun-like blast just before they hit. TROPHY was developed by RAFAEL together with Israel Aircraft Industries' Elta Group. The system is known as an "active protection system" (APS). The developers claim it is a major milestone in weapons design. They would have a system like TROPHY reduce or eliminate the need for heavy armor for combat vehicles".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TROPHY_Active_Protection_System

There, that wasn't so hard, eh?

sounds to me like it could be hacked/destroyed very easily, thus effectively rendering the APC to be nothing more than a light armored humvee. great idea though.

a couple well placed bullets and that system is toast though, if it's exposed.

Well actually it can't be hacked or destroyed easily. I mean in terms of advanced electronics, most battle tanks and APC's have tons of it and they are still reliable. Plus the radar system is of a panel design along the lines of a Aegis 360 radar system.

Ultimately my main point from this video is to quote wiki - "MSNBC has reported that there is resistance against incorporating TROPHY in the US Army. The US has contracted Raytheon to develop an equivalent system, which will not be ready before 2011 at the earliest, whereas TROPHY could be deployed much sooner. According to MSNBC's sources, the reason for not adopting TROPHY for now, and saving US lives in Iraq and other places, is that it would remove the need for the Raytheon program, causing it to be canceled."

So basically the current system which works, and can be depolyed right now, is shunned in favour of a Raytheon program that would only be ready in 2011! That's just complete and utter neglience and pork barrel polictics.

this thing shoots at rockets automatcally (looks like)

this could turn out to be a friendly fire disaster

If you watched the video the chance of FF is less then 1%

i would suspect that it costs alot and its far cheaper to have people die. us gov spents way way way to mutch on military alredy why waste mony when u got cheep people. i dont think people ore soduers reolise that thay are just tools ie exactly the same as a gun ore a bomb for use in destroying targits. things might change if the us army looks after its damaged solduers and ex military people better then it will be come realy exspensive for them to have people die and thus cheaper to use this system.

your sentiments are not out of line, westy, but I think in this case it's a case of wanting to *waste* money, as indicated by farhard's comment describing the Raytheon program...

Idiot pork-barrel politicians. Can't even get war right.

I mean, honestly, even if you support military efforts, it gets really annoying to see these greedy amateur bitches interfering in the process! At least in ancient Rome incompetent political leaders got killed much more frequently...

"At least in ancient Rome incompetent political leaders got killed much more frequently..."

You know I often wondered about this too, why is that in mordern history the only times assasins struck presidents is when we had someone capable; Abraham Lincoln, John F. Kennedy, Robert Kennedy (candidate but still counts, though am not really counting Ronald Reagen).

I mean thinking about what has happened in terms of geopolitics, how could the USA ever recover the trust of the international forum? Especially after that stunt at the UN High Security Council?

Whoever comes after Bush will retain a goverment that has little credibility worldwide, a large deficit, 2 probably on going conflicts and a whole region destabalized, rampant spending in the military industrial complex and scant spending on basic social initiatives. Frankly if I was a politician I wouldn't want to be the next to be running.

Yeah, sort of amazing they couldn't maintain a balanced budget like their friendly neighbours to the North. Nothing personal or anything - you'd think being bigger it would be easier or something.

Oh wait, that whole invasion thing. And tax cuts for the rich. Riiiight.

Good observation about assassinations - what is *up* with that? Conspiracy theories anyone?

*dead

The link to this video has been flagged as dead. Fix it within 7 days or it will be discarded (dead called by Gold Star member calvados)

Discarding this video. It was flagged as dead but not flagged undead within 7 days.