The doors of the Bull MRAP

I've posted a few times regarding what I see as a small mystery respecting the Ideal/Ceradyne/Oshkosh Bull MRAP.

As documented here, MRAP II includes a requirement for side doors.

And, as noted in the post linked just above, the available photos of the Bull show no evidence of side doors as such. Defense-related literature notes the deliberate intent of the Bull designers to omit the presence of doors in order to help ensure a more secure cabin space. As well, it has been pointed out that the windows of the Bull may be hinged to serve as escape hatches.

Perhaps hinged windows represent the Bull's attempt to meet the MRAP II requirement for side doors. I don't count that as settled fact.

From time to time, my amateur musings about MRAPs and JLTVs get linked from discussion boards dealing with investment, my questions regarding the Bull included. In one such thread I found the following, posted by "Amanda" (amandabreczinski):

This is going back to the original documents related to the process of procuring vehicles for MRAP II testing, specifically the DOD Q&A session with industry as stated below;

Q. 23
Reference: Performance Specification

Survivability is enhanced by the uniform application of armor across the side body of the crew compartment. An interruption of that uniformity may create a ballistic weak point in the armor.

Are the driver’s and co-driver’s doors required to be on the side of the vehicle?

If so, is the classified requirement for side protection also applicable for driver’s side door and seams?

A.23
Yes

Q.23a
Are the terms “door” and “hatch” interchangeable?

A.23a
Yes

The information, though valuable (and not readily available over the Internet prior to Amanda posting it from what I can tell), is not particularly surprising, but it does not entirely resolve small mystery regarding the Bull's side doors.

Obviously the DOD finds the Bull an attractive option since the vehicle has made it to the last stages of competition. That is simply part of the mystery, since the mere fact that the Bull has made it this far does not give the vehicle side doors. It simply means that DOD finds much to like with the vehicle--perhaps enough to overlook part of the MRAP II requirement.

The mystery here is not concern the presence or lack of side doors/hatches or however they are termed. The MRAP II requirement calls for ingress/egress from "doors," and if "door" and "hatch" are interchangeable then MRAP II expressly calls for ingress/egress from the vehicle doors.

That is where the apparent problem comes in. An escape hatch is not necessarily a point of ingress. In the case of the Bull, it is difficult to imagine routine ingress by the driver or co-driver through any of the side window "hatches" ("doors").

From the list of MRAP II requirements:

Vehicle doors shall enable the 5^th percentile female to 95 percentile male in full combat gear to rapidly ingress and egress the vehicle in response to tactical needs in full combat gear. (T) Full combat gear includes helmet, Body Armor, weapons, and all body borne equipment.

The list of requirements does not appear to unequivocally demand that the side doors must be used to accommodate additional requirements for rapid egress (for tactical purposes) of the vehicle crew, nor the requirement reproduced just above. But it seems obvious that more doors makes rapid loading and unloading of the crew easier to achieve in general.

So, in sum, a minor mystery remains in the question of how the Bull as it currently appears meets those sets of requirements, even if window hatches meet the technical requirement for side doors.

If you climb out that window, it looks like a pretty long drop to the ground to me.

clipped from www.idealinnovations.com

*****