BAE Systems-Northrop Grumman GCV Team Additions

• QinetiQ North America
• Saft

“We have built a team that has extensive experience and innovation in the development and production of combat systems and subsystems,” said Mark Signorelli, vice president and general manager of Ground Combat Vehicles at BAE Systems. “With this team we bring more to our customer by providing a vehicle that will meet the Army’s requirements for a highly survivable platform that can adapt to a constantly evolving and changing operational environment; from humanitarian relief to a full scale battlefield.”

Each teammate will bring a different capability to GCV that will help to strengthen the BAE Systems-Northrop Grumman team offering. As the prime contractor, BAE Systems will provide the overall program management and systems integration for GCV and will also be responsible for providing the vehicle design, structure, logistical support as well as the readiness and sustainment of the platform. Northrop Grumman will serve as the C4ISR (command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance) lead.

QinetiQ North America will provide the electric drive propulsion system or E-X-Drive™ for Ground Combat Vehicles. The E-X-Drive is the key component of the hybrid electric drive system, which minimizes electrical demand, saves on vehicle fuel costs, improves reliability, provides higher dash speed and acceleration and increased on-board and off-board power. Saft will provide the energy storage system for the GCV.

The BAE Systems-Northrop Grumman GCV offering will be the first combat vehicle designed from the ground-up to operate in an IED-threat environment. The team’s offering will provide survivability, mobility and versatility that will address the operational requirements of the customer. The GCV mine survivability will exceed that of a Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicle, while the enhanced mobility capabilities will allow the GCV to operate in urban and cross country environments. The team’s vehicle will also have an integrated electronic network capability and embedded intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance assets to connect the warfighters. The open architecture electronics will also be adaptable to future network upgrades as new technologies mature. The modular armor system will allow the unit commander to rapidly apply or remove kits in the field to adjust to the tactical situation.

BAE Systems is the top producer of combat vehicles in the world and provides nearly 80 percent of the vehicles in the Heavy Brigade Combat Team (HBCT).

The GCV program is a development effort headed by the U.S. Army to develop the first combat vehicle designed from the ground up to operate in an IED-threat environment.

Related Posts

• BAE, Northrop Submit GCV Bid — Army | C4ISR | GCV | IED | LON:BA | Military | news | Northrop Grumman | NYSE:NOC | Survivability
• BAE and Northrop Announce GCV Teaming Agreement — Army | C4ISR | Defense | GCV | LON:BA | news | Northrop Grumman | NYSE:RTN
• U.S. Bid for New GCV on Track — Army | Brigade Combat Team | Defense | GCV | government | Manufacturing | Military | MRAP

The company said in a news release Monday that preliminary testing of the new hull has shown the design increases the level of protection and survivability provided to soldiers against improvised explosive devices.

“Soldiers and Marines attending our warfighter’s forum earlier this year said their Stryker vehicles have performed superbly in Iraq and Afghanistan because of their speed, agility, stability and off-road capability,” said Gordon Stein, senior director for the General Dynamics Land Systems Stryker program.

“The double-V hull can easily be integrated into all variants of the Stryker.”

Deliveries will begin in January to allow vehicles to be available for use by the Stryker brigade that will rotate into Afghanistan next year and will be completed by February 2012, the company said.

General Dynamics employees in Anniston, Ala., and London, Ontario, will produce the vehicles.

The Stryker is an eight-wheeled combat vehicle designed in 10 configurations, including an infantry carrier, a command vehicle and a medical evacuation vehicle. It’s equipped with 14.5mm basic armor protection, General Dynamics said.

Related Posts

• General Dynamics Wins Contract For Stryker Vehicles — Army | General Dynamics | Mobility | news | NYSE:GD | TACOM
• GDLS Lands Contract to Build Strykers — Army | Defense | Industrial | Manufacturing | Military | news | TACOM
• GD Awarded $112 Million in Stryker Contracts — Army | Defense | NYSE:GD | Stryker | TACOM

Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle | Marines Get Modern Landing Craft (click for larger image)

General Dynamics also is scheduled to deliver two additional EFVs in the coming weeks, bringing the total at Pendleton to six. The vehicles, which cost $16.7 million each, are designed to rapidly transport Marine rifle squads ashore from ships located over the horizon. Pendleton will begin wide-scale testing of the prototypes in August.

The EFVs represent the latest in amphibous landing craft technology. They’re designed to travel about three times faster than conventional craft. But, as we noted during a previous post, the EFV, which weighs about 40 tons, experienced some speed and reliability problems during earlier tests.

Related Posts

• Marines’ Fighting Vehicle is Looking Good — Amphibious | CDR | EFV | expeditionary-fighting-vehicle | marine | weapons
• USMC Anticipates EFV LRIP in 2012 — Defense | EFV | Mobility | USMC
• Strykers to Get Double-Hull Protection — Afghanistan | Armor | Army | Combat | General Dynamics | IED | iraq | medical | news | NYSE:GD | protection | Stryker | Survivability | systems | vehicles

permalink: Marines Get Modern Landing Craft
topics: Armored Vehicles
tagged: Amphibious, EFV, General Dynamics, NYSE:GD, USMC, vehicles

subscribe: via RSS | via Email
connect: LinkedIn | Twitter | Bookmarks | Facebook

taktik(z), Inc. © 2010

While the protection of the MGV was based, in part, on hit avoidance, mobility and area dominance – hence, it could excel mainly in open terrain – the GCV will have good cross-country mobility similar to the Bradley, with a baseline requirement of 30mph off-road speed (compared to the Bradley’s 28mph).

However, it will offer superior survivability and performance, particularly operating in confined spaces like in urban combat. The U.S. Army would like its future GCV to have the blast protection level equal to the MRAP, improving its current protection, particularly against large IEDs. Base level protection of the vehicle could vary, and will be scalable to threat and mission.

Emphasis will also be given to crew and troops protection, through an enhanced ‘force protection’ package which will address survivability from blast, fire protection and other aspects. Overall, the protection and survivability of the vehicle should be equal to or better than any current combat platform.

A unique feature of GCV will be the situational awareness provided by full 360° observation from within the vehicle, and the hemispheric protection utilizing ‘hit avoidance systems’ – new features currently unavailable in most armored vehicles.

Providing enhanced protected mobility to warfighters means soldiers can dismount vehicles closer to the objective, an attribute that can be translated to reduce individual combat loads, lighter body armor, availability of firepower, networking and equipment closer to the dismounted troops.

Mission survivability is also becoming an important factor in the GCV design, with its electronic systems and networking designed to retain mission functionality, even when network support is degraded or interrupted.

Related Posts

• Mobility vs. Survivability — Amphibious | AMS | Armor | Army | Defense | EFV | GCV | JLTV | Mobility | MRAP | Navy | NYSE:TXT | SCTVC | Survivability
• GCV — Tracked, Auto Guns, 40 Tons? — Armor | Army | Bradley Fighting Vehicle | Defense | FCS | GCV | IED | marine | Mobility | MRAP | Stryker | Survivability | W56HZV-GCV
• U.S. Army’s New Ground Combat Vehicle — aerospace | Armor | Army | BCT | Defense | FCS | GCV | IED | MGV | Mobility | news

Advanced Defense Vehicle Systems filed the protest with the Government Accountability Office but officials said the complaint was unlikely to setback U.S. Army’s September plan to award contracts this summer for the new combat vehicle program.

The small Michigan-based company known by its acronym ADVS said in a statement that it had “submitted a proposal that offered proven technology developed by ADVS and its subcontractors that would provide the Army with an innovative, maneuverable vehicle offering an extraordinary level of crew protection.”

Still, the ADVS proposal was rejected on grounds of what Defense News claimed to unmet requirements set by the U.S. Army. Until that rejection, ADVS was among four companies bidding for a piece of the program.

All proposals for the first phase of the combat vehicle program were submitted in late May. Program officials expect to award up to three contracts for the technology development phase by Sept. 27.

The Army launched the GCV program in April 2009 as part of a larger Army Brigade Combat Team Modernization program, formerly known as Future Combat Systems. The modernization plan opts to use mine-resistant, ambush-protected vehicles while upgrading those currently in use, particularly the Styker.

Military experts anticipate the first ground combat vehicle to be used in infantry fighting, providing what they call a “highly survivable platform” for transferring infantry squads in field operations.

It is the first vehicle that will be designed from the ground up to operate in an improvised explosive device environment.

In recent weeks, senior U.S. Army officials have indicated their desire to trim combat vehicles in size and weight.

The Army’s Chief of Staff, Gen. George Casey, has specifically said that future replacements should be much lighter than the estimated 70 tons that program officials have specified that the new combat vehicle should weigh.

Also vying for the bid is BAE Systems, which has teamed with Northrop Grumman. Other industry teams have yet to be announced.

At least three contracts will be involved in the project. They include technology development, engineering and manufacturing design. Once the primary contractors are selected, the U.S. Army could take delivery of the vehicles within 5-7 years, military experts forecast.

Related Posts

• GD, Lockheed, Raytheon, MTU Team To Bid on GCV — Army | Boeing | Defense | engineering | GCV | MRAP | news | NYSE:GD | NYSE:LMT | NYSE:RTN | raytheon | safety | Survivability
• BAE, Northrop Submit GCV Bid — Army | C4ISR | GCV | IED | LON:BA | Military | news | Northrop Grumman | NYSE:NOC | Survivability
• GCV Effort Taking Shape — Army | BCT | GCV | IFV | Mobility | PEO

“I keep saying, ‘Look, man, an MRAP is about 23 tons, and you’re telling me this is going to be 70 tons, which is the same as an [M1] Abrams. Surely we can get a level of protection between that, that is closer to the MRAP than it is the M1,’ ” Casey said June 7. “It’s not going to be a super heavyweight vehicle.”

Casey’s comments come less than a month after Army Vice Chief of Staff Gen. Peter Chiarelli said at the Armor Conference at Fort Knox, Ky., that the GCV would weigh 50 to 70 tons.

Critics point out that a 70-ton GCV would be the world’s heaviest infantry fighting vehicle. By contrast, the heaviest vehicle for the Marine Corps is the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle, an amphibious armored personnel carrier. Still in development, it is expected to weigh 38 tons.

The Bradley can weigh up to 36 tons.

Defense firms submitted their proposals for the first phase of the GCV in late May. Program officials expect to award up to three contracts for the technology development phase in September.

The Army launched the GCV program in April 2009 as part of a larger Army Brigade Combat Team Modernization program, formerly known as Future Combat Systems.

The effort stood up quickly after a decision by Defense Secretary Robert Gates to kill the Manned Ground Vehicles portion of the Army’s FCS program in the fiscal 2010 defense budget. Gates spared the high-tech communications network and the spin-out technologies slated for fielding in 2011, but canceled the program’s family of 27-ton MGVs, criticizing the design as ill-suited to survive current battlefield threats.

The Army wants the GCV to have the underbelly armor of the MRAP, better side protection than the Bradley, some type of automatic cannon and an anti-tank missile system.

The V-shaped hull on the MRAP allows the vehicle to withstand blasts from roadside bombs and protect soldiers inside. The Bradley has side armor that can stop 20mm and other potent calibers. Newer Stryker vehicles can stop 14.5mm projectiles.

Officials want the GCV to perform well in open country, on roads and in urban areas.

Army officials stress the importance of the GCV since the service continues to rely on its fleet of 16,000 combat vehicles on a battlefield dominated by powerful improvised explosive devices.

“The Ground Combat Vehicle is going to be the first vehicle designed to operate in the environments that we’re operating in today, particularly in IED environments,” Casey said. “None of the vehicles that we have now, except possibly the MRAPs, are designed for that. … With the Bradley and the tank, they started back in the late 60s and early 70s, and they have been great, but as we built out the Bradley, it’s at the limits of size, weight and power.”

The Bradley can carry up to seven infantrymen in addition to a commander, gunner and driver.

The GCV is being designed to carry a complete nine-man infantry squad and a three-man crew and provide them with MRAP-like protection – that’s at least 50 tons using today’s technology, Chiarelli said at the Armor Conference.

But Casey said that soldiers who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan have told him that big, heavy vehicles just aren’t practical in urban combat.

“They’ll tell you, we stopped using tanks and Bradleys on the streets of Baghdad just because of the size,” Casey said. “We have to work the tradeoffs between protection and size.”

As for wheels or tracks, the Army did not specify in its request for proposals, but Chiarelli and other senior Army officials have said the GCV would likely have to be tracked based on the current weight projection.

For now, the plan is to ensure that the new vehicle can be transported by C-17 aircraft, rail and ship. An Army “analysis of alternatives” will attempt to provide some type of recommendation sometime this summer.

It is unusual for an analysis of alternatives to be done in parallel with the request for proposals process, but Army officials have said it’s being done that way to save time.

Army officials have said the five- to seven-year development timeline is in place to follow Pentagon acquisition-reform guidelines that call for more testing and competitive prototypes. The decision to build a new vehicle or buy a current design will be up to the Defense Department.

Casey said the Army has the time to work through these issues. The service aims to have a prototype in hand by 2015, and field the new infantry fighting vehicle in 2017.

“We’re at the beginning of the process,” Casey said. “This thing is going to take about seven years to get on the street.”

Related Posts

• U.S. Bid for New GCV on Track — Army | Brigade Combat Team | Defense | GCV | government | Manufacturing | Military | MRAP
• GCV — Tracked, Auto Guns, 40 Tons? — Armor | Army | Bradley Fighting Vehicle | Defense | FCS | GCV | IED | marine | Mobility | MRAP | Stryker | Survivability | W56HZV-GCV
• Industry Days Reveal GCV Requirements — ARCIC | Armor | Army | FCS | GCV | IFV

HEMTT A4 | Oshkosh Receives HEMTT Awards (click for larger image/slideshow)

Oshkosh has the capacity and production expertise to remanufacture and recapitalize heavily used vehicles back to like-new condition, offering significant cost savings to the government and taxpayer. The vehicles are returned to Oshkosh, stripped to their frame rails and completely rebuilt, and upgraded to the next-generation A4 configuration if needed.

“We leverage our world-class operations to supply recapitalized vehicles that are as advanced, reliable and high-performing as our new vehicles, but at a reduced cost for our military customers,” said Mike Ivy, vice president and general manager of Army Programs for Oshkosh Defense. “These vehicles undergo the same tests and inspections as new vehicles, and have the same bumper-to-bumper warranty, before being supplied to our Warfighters.”

Under one award, valued at more than $138 million, Oshkosh will produce and deliver more than 480 M983A4 HEMTT Light Equipment Transporters (LET) and one M1120A4 HEMTT Load Handling System (LHS). Production and delivery of these vehicles is expected to begin in October 2010 and be completed in August 2011.

For the second award, valued at more than $34 million, Oshkosh will recapitalize and deliver 140 HEMTT A4 LHS and cargo truck variants. Work for this award will run June 2010 through March 2011.

The Oshkosh HEMTT is the backbone for the U.S. Army’s logistics fleet. HEMTT LETs support soldiers with the transportation of light equipment in challenging environments and as part of the Stryker Recovery System. The HEMTT LHS uses the Oshkosh-produced Multilift load handling system to lift and transport payloads of up to 13 tons. The HEMTT cargo truck is used to haul equipment and supplies.

Related Posts

• TACOM Orders 45 Oshkosh HEMTT A4s — Armor | Army | Defense | FHTV | HEMTT | HET | images | Logistics | LTAS | news | NYSE:OSK | Oshkosh | PLS | TACOM
• Oshkosh Awarded Order for HEMTT and PLST — Army | automotive | Defense | FMTV | HEMTT | Industrial | Manufacturing | Military | Mobility | news | NYSE:OSK | Oshkosh | RECAP | TACOM
• Oshkosh Receives TPER Awards — Defense | HEMTT | Maintenance | Military | Mobility | news | NYSE:OSK | Oshkosh | sustainment | TACOM

The Army took a group of reporters to a dirt test track about 30 minutes from Aberdeen Proving Ground June 3 to put the new vehicles through their paces. At first glance, the JLTV looks heavier and safer than current light tactical vehicles.

R to L: BAE Systems, General Tactical Vehicles, Lockheed Martin JLTV (click for slideshow)

The armor plating and bullet-proof glass will offer better protection for the war fighter, officials said. The vehicle has different configurations, which seat four to six people.

The JLTV project is a joint project, but also international. The vehicle is a collaborative product between the U.S. Marine Corps, the U.S. Army, the Australian government and three American industry teams.

“There are three contractor teams working on a common phased set of requirements,” said U.S. Army Lt. Col. Wolfgang Petermann, project manager. “The vehicles have a little bit different design solutions built into them.”

Category A JLTV

Petermann said the contractors delivered the vehicles on schedule and within cost requirements of the contract.

“What you’ll see is a balanced solution,” he said. “The key attributes for JLTV are to keep that balance, but also to reduce life-cycle costs for the services. We’ve improved reliability, maintainability. We’ve designed the vehicle to be, one, reliable, but when it does break down, it is easily repairable.”

Petermann said another requirement is transportability.

“We need to be able to get to the fight by a C-130 (airplane) or CH-47 or CH-53 helicopter. We have to be able to get down to different decks on shipping,” he said. “We have maintained an expeditionary capability for the services.”

The contractors for the project are BAE Systems (LON:BA), General Tactical Vehicles and Lockheed Martin Corporation (NYSE:LMT). During the 15-month design and build phase, industry teams interpreted military’s requirements to come up with their own vehicle prototypes. Officials said the design and build phase ended May 3 when the contractors delivered the vehicles.

The JLTV has now entered a technology-development phase giving the team an opportunity to demonstrate “mature technologies integration” as a complete system.

Petermann said the group will conduct performance tests on the vehicles at Aberdeen Proving Ground to “provide an assessment of the technical and performance risks.”

The team will also conduct tests at Yuma Proving Ground, Ariz., to assess vehicle reliability. U.S. Army Research, Development and Engineering Command tank and automotive engineers from the unit’s research center near Detroit have been on the job from concept to testing. The U.S. Tank Automotive Research, Development and Engineering Center assists throughout product development, officials said.

“Our Advanced Concepts Group over in TARDEC from the beginning has taken a look at our requirements from the standpoint of what is achievable,” said Chris Brouwer, C4I chief systems engineer with the project. “They’ve given us that first look on what they think we’re going to get with the requirements we have. Because of the work TARDEC did, we were fairly confident what we would end up with.”

When the project team had requirements changes, TARDEC engineers would update their concepts. “They would say, ‘This is what we think industry is going to provide you,’” he said. “It really gave us an early benefit as far as what our requirements were actually driving into the design of the vehicle.”

Brouwer was on the team three years ago writing the original requirements and scope.

“It’s been a great project so far,” Brouwer said. “It’s very rewarding to see the vehicles out here on the track and performing quite well.”

The JLTV program is aligned with a joint program office under the management of the U.S. Army’s Project Manager for Joint Combat Support Systems, which falls under the leadership of Program Executive Officer for Combat Support and Combat Service Support.

Related Posts

• Army Awards JLTV Contracts — AM General | Army | BAE Systems | DoD | GDLS | General Dynamics | JLTV | lockheed-martin | LON:BA | NYSE:GD | NYSE:LMT | tactical vehicles
• GTV Completes JLTV Critical Design Review — Army | Defense | GTV | JLTV | Manufacturing | marine | Military | news | umv
• GTV Delivers JLTV TD Vehicles Ahead of Schedule — AM General | ARC | Armor | Army | EMD | General Dynamics | GTV | JLTV | Maintenance | Manufacturing | marine | Mobility | NYSE:GD

The Army is making vehicle and crew survivability its main priority in its Ground Combat Vehicle (GCV) program, while the Marine Corps is determined to reclaim its role as an expeditionary force that relies on lighter vehicles that can quickly be transported around the world.

The diverging paths return the two services to their definitional roles, but they also represent fundamentally different perspectives on how forces should fight – and could undercut the services’ joint effort to build a replacement for tens of thousands of Humvee utility vehicles.

“We need to get lighter,” Lt. Gen. George Flynn, commander of the Marine Corps Combat Development Command, told reporters June 3 at the Pentagon. “And sometimes, when you look at your vehicle strategy, you have to take a look at the environment that you’re going to operate in. There’s a protection that comes from mobility. If you can move fast and if you can move on unpredictable routes, you can not necessarily armor up as much.”

The Army, on the other hand, has set very aggressive protection requirements for its GCV, which is now expected to be tracked and weigh 50 to 70 tons.

There’s really no way around 50-plus tons when a vehicle has to carry 12 soldiers, have a gun turret, and accept upgradable armor as IEDs get better, said one source familiar with the program.

Critics point out that at 70 tons, the GCV would be the heaviest infantry fighting vehicle in existence – as heavy as the Abrams tank.

But Army leaders note that the top weight includes scalable armor that would be used only when needed.

“This whole idea about deployability is much, much easier to talk about on this side of the next war, but on the other side of the next war, when people are shooting at you, survivability really, really means something,” Gen. Peter Chiarelli, vice chief of the Army, told an audience at the Army’s armor conference last month in Ft. Knox, KY.

Again, a difference in approach: Brig. Gen. Michael Brogan, commander of the Marine Corps Systems Command, told lawmakers in March that vehicle and body armor is not the only way to lower troops’ risk.

“Our protection philosophy must also include training our leaders in personal protective measures that provide flexibility and protection scalability,” Brogan said March 17 before the House Armed Services seapower and expeditionary forces subcommittee.

“Where speed, tactical maneuverability, environmental and terrain consideration dictate the most important capabilities needed in our vehicles, we will carefully consider the tradeoffs in conventional heavy armor protection versus the operational requirements for performance,” Brogan said. “These tradeoffs are not taken lightly and they are done with full consideration that our Marines will be taking the vehicles into harm’s way.”

↑ top

JLTV DEBATE

Together, the services are working through the tradeoffs between survivability and transportability in the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV) program, where the Marine Corps has raised concerns about vehicle weight.

“Although weight is a huge operational and tactical concern for both the Army and Marines, it is really more of a problem for the Marine Corps at the strategic level because of their ‘get there the fastest with the mostest’ expeditionary mandate,” an industry source said.

Key among the Corps’ concerns is “weighing out” a ship before it is “cubed out:” creating a load that makes the ship too heavy to maneuver long before its cargo spaces are filled.

“It’s hard to tell the Navy how to design an amphibious ship if we don’t know what the weight is of all the equipment that we’re going to put on it,” Flynn said.

While the Marine Corps remains committed to the JLTV program, it is also pursuing lower-cost and lighter-weight upgrades to its Humvee fleet that may eventually compete with JLTV funding. Chief among these is the Small Combat Tactical Vehicle Capsule (SCTVC) developed by Textron Marine and Land Systems and Granite Tactical Vehicles. The bolt-on capsule fits onto the chassis of existing Humvees. With the capsule, the vehicle weighs less than an up-armored Humvee, yet is much better protected.

Textron and Granite Tactical Vehicles also intend to enter the SCTVC in a competition to win an Army contract to upgrade Humvees, according to Mark Savarese, vice president of business development for Textron Marine & Land Systems.

The companies have delivered six vehicles to the Marine Corps for testing.

The Marine Corps Warfighting Lab at Quantico, Va., completed blast and ballistic testing on the vehicle, and this August, they will do hot-weather testing, according to Marine Corps spokesman Lt. Col. Roger Galbraith. After that testing is complete, the Marine Corps will make a decision whether or not to move forward with the program, he said.

If the Corps decides to go down this road instead of sticking with the JLTV program, it can use the money saved to help pay for the “much-maligned” Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle, “which they really, really want,” the industry source said.

↑ top

MRAPS’ FATE

The services also have to decide how to use their MRAPs. While the Army first thought it would put most of them into equipment sets that units could choose to leave home, the service is now considering putting more of them directly into units.

At the armor conference, Chiarelli said it’s well-known that other services don’t want MRAPs because they don’t fit on ships.

“But as soon as we go anywhere where you need that level of protection, the first thing you hear is ‘Where are the MRAPs?’” he said.

Flynn said the Marine Corps is considering the issue in its still-under-construction ground tactical vehicles strategy.

“We’re looking at what is the right mix for the Marine Corps,” he said. “For example, not every battalion is going to have a full complement of MRAPs.”

But if Marines are headed into an environment with IEDs, they could go to the vehicle pool and get the right vehicles for the mission, he said.

Flynn said the service is evaluating three categories of vehicles: heavy, medium and light. Heavy includes tanks and amphibious assault vehicles, Light Armored Vehicles fall into the medium category and light are the up-armored Humvees and JLTVs.

“Anytime you finish up a major conflict or you are at the end of major conflict or you’ve just experienced a major conflict, everybody then says, ‘OK, what should we do with the future force?’” Flynn said.

The Marine Corps and the Army are going through that process now, re-establishing their roles while grappling with what they have experienced in Iraq and Afghanistan.

“After eight-plus years of doing this, it’s easy to default to the Marine Corps as a second land army,” Flynn said. “But, we’re not. We have a role in these two fights; we’ve performed that role as part of the joint force. What we’re trying to say now is ‘OK, what is the Marine Corps? What is the role of the Marine Corps in the future?’”

The answer to that question is a “sea-based force that is truly expeditionary and responsive,” Flynn said.

While the services may be making different choices when it comes to survivability versus mobility, it does not necessarily signify a disagreement, Flynn said.

“I think the United States needs a heavy capability; I think the United States needs a sea-based capability,” Flynn said. “This joint tool kit truly has to have multiple tools.”

The services will continue to work closely together, he added.

“We don’t always agree, but we do get a lot of synergy out of working together and by knowing what each other are doing,” Flynn said.

Related Posts

• Protection & Mobility — Armor | Army | GCV | MGV | Mobility | Survivability
• GTV Completes JLTV Critical Design Review — Army | Defense | GTV | JLTV | Manufacturing | marine | Military | news | umv
• Army Chief Of Staff Wants Lighter GCV — Armor | Army | BCT | EFV | FCS | GCV | M1 Abrams | MRAP

MATV (click for slideshow)

Oshkosh Corporation says the configuration changes for U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) include a modified cargo deck to carry equipment “based on the requirements of each mission,” a rear storage accessible through a hatch in the passenger area, and a larger windshield.

The SOCOM M-ATV variant can seat four people and a gunner, or five people with a remote-controlled weapon station.

Oshkosh Defense will deliver 420 of the specialized M-ATVs between September and November.

The M-ATV is designed for off-road use on the rough terrain in Afghanistan and Iraq. Oshkosh has also developed variations of its M-ATV to serve as critical-care ambulances and re-supply utility vehicles.

So far, the company says, it’s been awarded more than $5 billion in contracts for M-ATVs, spare parts, upgrades, and after-market support.

Related Posts

• Oshkosh Develops MATV Variants — aerospace | Afghanistan | Defense | Maintenance | MATV | Military | Mobility | MRAP | news | NYSE:OSK | Oshkosh
• Oshkosh Receives TACOM M-ATV Award — Army | automotive | Defense | MRAP | news | NYSE:OSK | Oshkosh | Plasan | TACOM
• Oshkosh Receives Order for Additional 1,000 MATVs — Army | automotive | Defense | FMTV | Manufacturing | marine | MATV | Military | Mobility | MRAP | Navy | news | NYSE:OSK | Oshkosh | Plasan | TACOM

permalink: Oshkosh Develops M-ATV for Special Forces
topics: Land Forces
tagged: Defense, IED, MATV, NYSE:OSK, Oshkosh, SOCOM

subscribe: via RSS | via Email
connect: LinkedIn | Twitter | Bookmarks | Facebook

taktik(z), Inc. © 2010