Sound Off! Military Motorcycles

Motorcycles for military usage - good thing?  Or bat-shit crazy?  Sound off below!

By: Brant

Relocating of Pre-Positioned Stocks Coming

The US is planning to relocate much of their pre-positioned vehicle and equipment sets.

In a significant indication of where the Army anticipates it will be deployed over coming years, and what it will be doing there, the service is planning to relocate some of its vast overseas stores of combat equipment and alter the contents of other warehouse stocks to reflect the changing nature of the mission after the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Large numbers of MRAPs, the armored troop carriers built to withstand the blast of improvised explosives in Iraq and Afghanistan, would be stored in Italy, where they could be transported for contingencies across Africa. Those could include disaster relief in hostile environments, civilian evacuations or counterinsurgency assistance to local security forces.

In addition, MRAPs would be sent to warehouses in the western Pacific for potential use during a conflict on the Korean Peninsula, under current planning being included in Pentagon budgets now taking shape, even as significant numbers are stored in Southwest Asia and the Persian Gulf region.

Plans call for the brigade-size stock of armored fighting vehicles now stored in Europe to be brought home, although other infantry and support equipment would remain. A primary mission for the gear to be stored in Europe would be to supply multilateral training exercises among American and allied troops.

The Army wants to locate sets of equipment that could be pulled from storage for multilateral training exercises and other contingencies in the Asia-Pacific region, most likely aboard ships and perhaps in Australia, officials say. Other Army storage sites around the world may see an increase in gear designed for humanitarian assistance and disaster relief.

By: Brant

GD Up To Their Roadwheels in Deep Doo-Doo

There's an IG report on General Dynamics "wasting" a metric assload of money on the Stryker program, and apparently never tried not to...

The Army is weighing changes in General Dynamics Corp.’s contract to maintain Stryker armored combat vehicles after the Pentagon’s inspector general found the terms led to excess spending of as much as $336 million, or 23 percent.

The no-bid contract resulted in “little, if any, cost risk for the contractor or incentive to control costs,” the inspector general said in an audit. The Army responded by starting a “business case analysis” of potential changes, according to Ashley Givens, spokeswoman for the service’s Ground Combat Systems.

Under contracts that began in 2002 and were awarded without competition, General Dynamics is paid to perform maintenance and to buy, store and issue spare parts for the Army’s 2,576 Stryker vehicles, which were built by the company.

The 19-ton, eight-wheeled vehicles have driven an estimated 40 million miles (64 million kilometers) during the Iraq and Afghan wars. Seventy-seven Strykers have been destroyed in battle since 2002, and 435 were damaged.

Since the first contract in May 2002, Army officials “have made no progress in converting the high-risk cost-reimbursable contract or portions to a preferred lower risk, firm-fixed contract,” the audit, dated June 18, found. “As a result, the Stryker contract was at a higher risk of misuse, waste and inadequate accountability.”

By: Brant

Army's New Ground Combat Vehicle Contract. Yes, Again.

Some excellent background on how we got where we are today.

The GCV Infantry Fighting Vehicle is not a simple competition among existing vehicle types, though the global armored vehicle industry could easily have offered that. Instead, it was decided to run GCV as a clean sheet design for a new armored vehicle that would incorporate all of the lessons learned in Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.

“All” can be a dangerous goal for a military that needs on-time, on-budget, reasonably priced solutions. The initial GCV RFP resulted in design submissions that were reportedly in the 60-70 ton range. That’s almost double the weight of a 33 ton Bradley family vehicle, or of new designs like Korea’s K-21 KNIFV; and 50% higher than even heavy IFVs like Germany’s Puma and Britain’s FRES-SV. Indeed, it’s equivalent to a heavy main battle tank like the M1 Abrams.

The August 2010 GCV RFP cancellation resulted in a new RFP that emphasized use of “mature” technologies, but didn’t change some of the key requirements driving issues like weight, size and cost. Nor did it change the Army’s insistence on big performance increases in a number of areas.

Under the terms of its revised RFP, the GCV Program is driven to achieve a set of primary imperatives called the “Big Four”. These “Big Four” imperatives are defined as follows:

- Force Protection: Including protection against IED land mines. This is not a traditional strength of tracked vehicles lighter than main battle tanks, due to their flat bottoms.
- Capacity: vehicle crew and a fully-equipped 9 soldier Infantry squad. That’s relatively large. The Bradley carries just 6, and survivability needs and “space under armor” are the 2 requirement sets that do the most to determine vehicle size and weight. Which in turn affect costs.
- Full Spectrum: “A versatile platform able to adapt and/or enhance capabilities through configuration changes of armor and network while providing for growth over time in terms of size, weight, power and cooling.” This has been a steady trend in current IFVs over time, including the Bradley.
- Timing: A design that can have the 1st production vehicle delivered and accepted within 7 years of the TD phase contract award.
Under the revised September 2010 RFP, some requirements were “Tier 1”: specifically defined, and must be met. Tier 2 and Tier 3 requirements must be addressed, but the vendors are responsible for making tradeoffs among them. Vendors that DID talked to believe this left the Army with better solutions than they would otherwise have received.

Much more at the link. Go read.

By: Brant

Sound Off! Specialized Platforms or One-Size-Fits-All

Do you build your vehicle fleet on...

... distinct platforms for each system (AFV, tank, arty, etc)?
... a common platform that does many things "well" and nothing "excellent"?

Sound off below!

By: Brant

3D Displays Without Glasses? The Army Wants You

The US Army is looking to build glasses-free 3D displays for future combat vehicles.

U.S. Army vetronics researchers are canvassing industry to see which companies might be able to provide glasses-free 3D display technology, or autostereoscopic displays, and to determine if the time is right for a formal solicitation to acquire glasses-free 3D display technology for future armored combat vehicles or unmanned vehicle control stations.
The Ground Vehicle Robotics branch of the Army Tank Automotive Research, Development and Engineering Center (TARDEC) in Warren, Mich., on Wednesday issued a request for information (RFI: W56HZVRFI3D) as part of a market survey to assess the potential to obtain an autonomously adjustable autostereoscopic display system and test it on an Army vehicle.
The market survey is part of a potential TARDEC 3D Display Without Glasses and Head Tracking program. Autostereoscopy refers to displaying stereoscopic images without the aid of special headgear or glasses -- typically by using eye-tracking and multiple views so that the display does not need to sense where the viewer's eyes are located.

much more at the link
h/t Greg

By: Brant

UK In Action: Warthog Trials

Seen here on trial at ATDU Bovington, the Warthog is an all terrain protected mobility vehicle that gives protection against current and emerging mine strike threats. Warthog is a modified and better protected version of the Singapore Army Bronco. It will be equipped with an upgraded cooling and filtration system, Bowman BCIP 5 communications fit, mine blast protection and Electronic Counter Measures (ECM). Warthog will provide Protected Mobility (PM) for the infantry with its protection, firepower and mobility. It will also operate in a Mounted Close Combat (MCC) role and provide support to Dismounted Close Combat (DCC). The vehicle is able to operate in a range of environments including the Green Zone and desert areas of Afghanistan. Warthog with its associated communications, ECM suite, mine blast protection, load carriage, crew served weapon system and increased tactical mobility & range will be a considerable enhancement to elements of ground manoeuvre capability in Afghanistan. All Warthogs are equipped with a crew served weapon system. This provides them with a protected weapon station from which the commander will be able to quickly deliver fire on either the 7.62mm General Purpose Machine Gun (GPMG) or 0.5 Calibre Heavy Machine Gun (HMG). The mount allows accurate, suppressive fire out to 1000m allowing for effective self defence or the provision of fire support when required.MobilityWarthog has been designed to be easily moved by air, sea, rail, road and landing craft. When operating it has the ability to cover some of the most demanding types of ground.Crew Front 3 and rear 8Overall length 8.9mHeight Front-2.95m Rear 2.32mMax Speed 60kph

img from UK MoD

By: Widow 6-7

UK In Action: Mastiff & Wolfhound

A Mastiff Armoured vehicle is pictured in front of a Wolfhound. The 2nd Royal Tank Regiment’s Falcon Squadron, based in Tidworth, Hants, have arrived at Camp Bastion in Afghanistan’s Helmand province and are conducting their final training – known as RSOI - before going out on the ground. RSOI – or the Reception Staging and Onward Integration package, to give it its full title - is mandatory for all soldiers entering Afghanistan. Here the guys have a last practice of their skills in the conditions they will face out on the ground. They are also taught the enemy’s latest techniques by soldiers returning from their tour of duty.

img from UK MoD

By: Widow 6-7

Monday Video: I'm on a Brad!

Start your week off with a BANG! of a spoof




By: Brant

New US Army Ground Vehicle Contracts!

Somehow we missed this at the end of last week... eesh! The US Army Announces Ground Combat Vehicle Contracts.

The Army announced today the award of two contracts to BAE Systems Land and Armaments, L.P., Troy, Mich. ($449,964,969), and General Dynamics Land Systems, Inc., Sterling Heights, Mich. ($439,715,950), for the Ground Combat Vehicle (GCV) program technology development phase. These contractors have been selected to develop competitive, affordable and executable designs for a new Army Infantry Fighting Vehicle (IFV) over the next 24 months.

The contract awards follow the Department of Defense’s formal approval of the GCV program to enter the technology development phase. Approval of this first major milestone builds on months of ongoing collaboration between the Army and the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology and Logistics) to successfully develop, build and field an affordable, effective and suitable IFV.

“The Army enthusiastically welcomes the formal launch of the Ground Combat Vehicle program, which will provide much needed protection and mobility to soldiers in combat,” said Secretary of the Army John McHugh. “Given the economic environment the nation currently faces, the Army recognizes that it is imperative to continually address requirements as we build a versatile, yet affordable, next-generation infantry fighting vehicle.”

The department’s GCV acquisition strategy, which emphasizes affordability and a seven-year schedule, calls for aggressive exploration of GCV IFV capabilities trade-space via continued requirements and affordability analysis during the 24-month technology development phase. As the Army finalizes GCV requirements during this phase of the formal acquisition process, these efforts will enable the Army to realize program schedule and affordability objectives. The Army remains committed to a seven-year schedule as the appropriate amount of time necessary to design, develop, build and test the next-generation infantry fighting vehicle.

To develop a successful program with well-informed decision points at each major milestone, the Army will undertake a three-pronged approach during the first phase of this effort. First, contractors will work collaboratively with the Army to develop competitive, best-value engineering designs to meet critical Army needs. Concurrently, the Army will initiate an update to its GCV IFV analysis of alternatives and conduct separate technical and operational assessment of existing non-developmental vehicles. Results from this assessment, along with contractors design efforts, will inform GCV requirements to support the next program milestone and facilitate a full and open competition for the next phase of the GCV program.

“This is an important milestone in our Army's modernization program. GCV is the first combat vehicle designed from inception for an IED environment. It will provide armor protection and the capability to maneuver cross-country with the nine-man infantry squad." said Army Chief of Staff Gen. Martin E. Dempsey.

The Army’s overall strategy for developing GCV is consistent with efforts to implement acquisition reform and best acquisition practices.

By: Brant

Libyan Rebels Adapt, Improvise, Overcome

I'd hate to see what the crew drill looks like for this...

DefenseTech reports:

Ok, this is wild. Libyan rebels have taken their Mad Max technical pickup trucks to a new level. The video above show rebels firing what appears to be the turret-mounted 2A28 Grom gun of a Soviet-designed BMP-1 armored personnel carrier from the back of a pickup. Yes, the entire gun turret has been mounted on crude metal supports in the bed of the truck. Note the office swivel chair that has replaced the original gunner’s seat. Also watch the guy standing next to the truck reach inside the turret to fire the gun. Classic.

h/t Greg

By: Brant

UK In Action: Saxon Rides Again

A Saxon Armoured Personnel Vehicle from the Cheshire Regiment moves at speed into battle. Soldiers from The Cheshire Regiment, 1 Mechanised Brigade 3 (UK) Armoured Division take part in Exercise Iron Anvil at the British Army Training Unit, Suffield, Canada.

Image: UK MoD

By: Widow 6-7

BUB: US DoD Contracts

Taking a quick look at a few contracting bits and pieces out there...

DARPA has another cute acronym out there, this one is SCENICC: Soldier Centric Imaging via Computational Cameras

The Soldier Centric Imaging via Computational Cameras (SCENICC) Broad Agency Announcement seeks proposals that fully exploit the computational imaging paradigm and associated emerging technologies to yield ultra-low size, weight, and power (SWaP) persistent/multi-functional soldier-scale Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) systems that greatly enhance warfighter awareness, capability, security, and survivability.

Anyone want to take a swag as to what this actually means? And is SCENICC any worse of an acronym than "GUARD DOG" (Graph Understanding and Analysis for Rapid Detection - Deployed on the Ground)

+++

What does TACOM's new Ground Combat Vehicle RFP look like?

The GCV IFV Program's intent is to develop and deliver an affordable and effective infantry fighting vehicle in seven years by utilizing mature technologies and focusing on system design that integrates all subsystems and components.
It is the Government's intent for contractors to utilize mature, low-risk technologies. To this end, offerors need to identify their approaches to maximize the inclusion of mature technologies selected, giving consideration to any modifications necessary for effective integration. Offerors may non-developmental, modified non-developmental or developmental solutions. The specific evaluation criteria are described in Section M of this RFP.
The GCV IFV Program is driven to achieve four primary imperatives referred to as the "Big Four". These imperatives have been decomposed into the Tier One (1) GCV IFV Performance Specification requirements.
These "Big Four" imperatives are defined as follows:
-Force Protection is achieving a threshold level of protection for all occupants against the threats identified in the classified annex of the GCV IFV Performance Specification.
-Capacity is a vehicle crew and a fully-equipped nine soldier Infantry squad.
-Full Spectrum is a versatile platform able to adapt and/or enhance capabilities through configuration changes of armor and network while providing for growth over time in terms of size, weight, power and cooling.
-Timing is the delivery and acceptance of the first production GCV IFV vehicle within seven years of the TD phase contract award.

+++

And the Navy is cutting 2 different contracts for the Littoral Combat Ship contract.

The Navy has awarded Lockheed Martin Corp. and Austal USA each a fixed-price incentive contract for the design and construction of a 10 ship block-buy, for a total of 20 littoral combat ships from fiscal 2010 through fiscal 2015.

The amount awarded to Lockheed Martin Corp. for fiscal 2010 littoral combat ships is $436,852,639. The amount awarded to Austal USA for the fiscal 2010 littoral combat ships is $432,069,883. Both contracts also include line items for nine additional ships, subject to Congressional appropriation of each year’s Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) Program requirements. When all 10 ships of each block buy are awarded, the value of the ship construction portion of the two contracts would be $3,620,625,192 for Lockheed Martin Corp., and $3,518,156,851 for Austal USA. The average cost of both variants including government-furnished equipment and margin for potential cost growth across the five year period is $440 million per ship. The pricing for these ships falls well below the escalated average Congressional cost cap of $538 million.

“The awards represent a unique and valuable opportunity to lock in the benefits of competition and provide needed ships to our fleet in a timely and extraordinarily cost effective manner,” said Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus.

This award is a unique opportunity to maximize the buying power on the LCS Program by leveraging the highly effective competition between the bidders. Each contractor’s 10-ship bids reflect mature designs, investments made to improve performance, stable production, and continuous labor learning at their respective shipyards. The award was based on limited competition between teams led by Lockheed Martin and Austal USA. Under these contracts, both shipbuilders will also deliver a technical data package as part of the dual award, allowing the government a wide range of viable alternatives for effective future competition.

By: Brant

Tactical Armoured Patrol Vehicle RFP

This excerpt from the draft request for proposals outlines the roles for Canada's new Tactical Armoured Patrol Vehicle.

TAPV Tactical Operations

Protected transport, tactical reconnaissance and patrol tasks shall be required on all missions from peace support to full combat, and shall be a factor everywhere on the battlefield. The mix of light, medium and heavy force support shall depend on the force makeup and tasks. The TAPV could be assigned to all sections, platoons, patrols and troops conducting tactical operations.

The TAPV Project shall deliver two base configurations:

a. General Utility; and
b. Reconnaissance.

It is envisioned that the TAPV output shall include/contribute to:

a. Situational awareness of the battle space through observation and data collection;
b. Support to command and control (C2) through the development and maintenance of shared SA;
c. Net-Centric Operations support through information transport as nodes and knowledge sharing;
d. Protection against conventional weapons, terrorists and support to recovery;
e. Tactical operations support, including the conduct of operational manoeuvre, defensive operations, recce and surveillance tasks and control of territory, populations, and resources;
f. Support to operations related to POWs, refugees and internally displaced personnel;
g. Support to and protection of logistics operational requirements (convoy escort);
h. Support to specific operations, such as direct action, counterterrorism, civil-military operations (CIMIC), and psychological operations (PSYOPs);
i. Stability Operations, such as Peace Support Operations (PSO) and Humanitarian Assistance;
j. Domestic Operations, such disaster relief and critical infrastructure protection;
k. Military Assistance to Civil Authorities and Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies and Aid to Civil Power; and
l. Full spectrum operations including conventional warfare and COIN operations.

It shall be operated as a stand-alone single-type vehicle (in a convoy for instance) up to a sub-unit strength. Force protection is paramount to its conception, but cross-country mobility shall be maintained to fulfill its functions, especially that of recce. The TAPV shall provide sufficient levels of deployability and mobility to support the expeditionary forces it conducts operations with.

The TAPV shall provide mobile protected recce, surveillance and patrol task support to allow deployed lightweight assets to conduct tactical operations in the full spectrum of conflict.

The TAPV shall be employed in the conduct of, but not limited to recce, surveillance, patrolling, and command and liaison tasks. Additionally, the vehicle shall provide for protected transport of troops and VIPs in theatre. Primary users shall be:

m. Armoured Recce Squadrons - Recce Troops;
n. Light Infantry Companies - Light Infantry Recce Platoon and Sniper Section;
o. Light Infantry Companies - Light Infantry patrols; and
p. Deployed Task Force Support - Patrol vehicles primarily for National Support Elements (NSE), Operational Mentor and Liaison Team (OMLT); and secondly for Provincial Reconstruction Team (PRT), Military Policy (MP), Civil-Military Cooperation (CIMIC), Psychological Operations (PSYOPS) and other command support tasks (e.g. liaison officers).

Roles stated in Paragraphs a. and b. will be conducted using the Recce configuration, while roles for Paragraphs c. and d. will be conducted using the General Utility configuration.

Drivers and maintainers shall require a detailed knowledge of their vehicle and its equipment properties. Drivers and equipment operator shall also be familiar with field repairs and maintenance, to ensure that continued functional qualities of the system are maintained. Maintenance personnel shall be able to conduct first line maintenance and repairs as well as being able to determine the effectiveness of damaged and repaired vehicles.

Commanders at all levels shall be responsible for risk assessments when recce and patrol operations are required in high threat conditions. In particular, commanders shall understand the capabilities and limitations of these vehicles.

By: Shelldrake

UK In Action: Wolfhound Training

Soldiers from 16 Air Assault are pictured conducting driver training with the new Wolfhound vehicle on a purpose built driver training area in Camp Bastion, Afghanistan. The off road course is designed to push the vehicles and drivers to the limit, in order to give crews the confidence and experience before deploying on real operations.

Image: UK MoD

By: Widow 6-7

Smart Tank!

h/t Wargamer.com



By: Brant

AUSA Name that vehicle!

Can you ID this vehicle? Sound off in the comments!

UK In Action: Smokin'!

A Land Rover, adapted with a Weapon Mounted Installation Kit (WMIK), is pictured practicing evasive manoeuvring and snatch drills.

Image: UK MoD

By: Widow 6-7

Russian Army Full of Hot Air

No really, they have a corps of inflatable vehicles.

Easy to transport and even easier to deploy, the Russian military is sure looking good. But get too close and you'll see its little secret: it's inflatable.

The Russian military has been investing in inflatable decoys vastly cheaper than actual military equipment, blow-up plastics that offer the illusion of anything ranging from pretend tanks to complete radio stations.

The weapons deceptively start as large plastic sheets, shipped in a black duffel bag. With the assistance of little other than an air pump, a tank can take form in a matter of seconds, ready to roll out -- with a push from a few soldiers, of course.

These decoys lack any actual fire-power defense, of course, though they are made of special material that tricks enemy radar and thermal imaging into thinking they are real. According to an article in the Russian Times, Rusbal, a private Russian company, makes inflatable S-300 missiles, T-80 and T-72 tanks, and Su-27 and MiG-31 fighter jets -- all life-size and, the company says, extremely difficult to distinguish from the real thing when viewed by radar or satellite.

By: Brant

Stryker Brigade Stryking on With No Strykers

Are they "Stryking out"? Or are they "Struck"?

Work has been fairly relaxed for thousands of infantrymen since they returned to Joint Base Lewis-McChord this summer from yearlong assignments in the Middle East. They've been going to classes, checking their gear and doing physical training in the mornings.

Anything more complicated would require the soldiers to have possession of their Strykers, the 21-ton combat vehicles they left behind in the deserts of Iraq and the mountains of Afghanistan.

In any event, the worldwide whirlwind of whiplash on what's where and when says:

The route from the Middle East to Lewis-McChord has been different than in past deployments, when Strykers came directly to their home base for major maintenance.

This time, the 3rd Brigade handed its Strykers to a Hawaii-based brigade now in Iraq. The 2nd Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division turned over its vehicles to a Germany-based brigade now deployed in Afghanistan. (The 2nd Brigade was flagged as the 5th Brigade during its yearlong deployment to southern Afghanistan.)

The Army took replacement Strykers at Fort Irwin, Calif., for the two Lewis-McChord brigades, which saved the costs of shipping vehicles to and from the battlefield. Afghanistan is a particularly expensive destination because Strykers must be flown into the landlocked country.

Meanwhile, Lewis-McChord's 4th Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division is keeping its old Strykers; the soldiers last saw them as they headed for ships in Kuwait. They're now lined up for overhauls at the Army Depot in Anniston, Ala., where General Dynamics has centralized much of its Stryker production.

By: Brant