The BAE Systems-Iveco Defense consortium offers a modified version of the SuperAV 8x8 combat vehicle for the ACV 1.1 program
The long and costly process of replacing the US Marine Corps Amphibious Assault Vehicle is finally showing signs of progress. Let us recall the history of the program and its main stages
Over the past several decades, the United States Marine Corps (ILC) has spent billions of dollars on numerous programs in an as yet fruitless quest to replace its AAV-7A1 Amphibious Assault Vehicle tracked assault vehicles during the Vietnam War.
The corps has been using the AAV-7A1 series vehicles to transport infantry from ship to shore since 1971. Despite the continuous upgrades of this platform, serious concerns are expressed not only about its insufficient survivability in the face of developing threats, but also about limited mobility on water and land, lethality, not to mention network capabilities.
In 2011, the ILC closed the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle (EFV) program, which has been developing a replacement for the current AAV-7A1 platform for many years. Its cost was constantly growing, and the car showed poor performance during tests; the net cost was approximately $ 3 billion. The high speed of movement on the water, which they wanted to achieve from the EFV, was considered technically unfeasible without a significant decrease in the level of survivability and lethality of the platform.
More problems
The Pentagon soon began two more programs for the Marine Corps. The first was named the ACV (Amphibious Combat Vehicle) amphibious combat vehicle, it was supposed to incorporate some of the structural elements of the EFV project and replace the outdated AAV. The second vehicle, designated MPC (Marine Personnel Carrier - Marine Corps Armored Personnel Carrier), was supposed to operate in conjunction with ACV and serve as a specialized platform for delivering infantry to the coast.
Unlike the AAV, EFV or ACV vehicles, the MPC was conceived rather not as a platform with full amphibious capabilities, but rather as a platform with sufficient buoyancy to overcome inland water obstacles, such as lakes or rivers, and conduct operations without landing craft.
However, in 2013, the MPC program was also suspended indefinitely (and again due to financial problems), but subsequently in March 2014 it was resurrected under the new designation ACV Stage 1 Sub-stage 1 (ACV 1.1). Currently, despite a twisted and disastrous start, the program to replace the KMP floating vehicle has finally gotten off the ground.
A first draft RFP for ACV 1.1 was published by the Floating Car Program Office in November 2014, and a second draft RFP was released in January 2015.
The final request for proposals was posted in March. This updated document details the revised Hull requirements for the first of a series of promising ACVs that Marines will use for ship-to-shore transport, ground operations, and self-return to ship.
General Dynamics intends to offer a modified version of the LAV 6.0 machine for the ACV program
Prototype contracts
The ILC is currently evaluating industry responses on an eight-wheeled amphibious combat vehicle optimized for onshore and offshore operations, with the prospect of issuing development and pre-production contracts to two companies at the end of 2016; each contract provides for the manufacture of 16 machines.
Given the previous budgetary constraints and striving to keep the cost within reasonable limits, the ILC is choosing an affordable ACV project with a planned cost of no more than $ 5 million per unit and hopes to achieve an initial delivery to the troops in 2020 and full combat readiness in 2023.
According to information from the request for proposals, the ILC wants to receive a modified ACV project, in which the wheeled vehicle has the same maneuverability as the Abrams tank, and also has sufficient survivability and can withstand improvised explosive devices (IEDs), land mines, shell fragments and armor-piercing bullets from a large-caliber machine gun … The ACV will eventually be armed with an M2 heavy machine gun and a remotely controlled weapon station with the ability to mount the MK19 stabilized grenade launcher.
The vehicle should provide protected mobility for 10-13 infantry and three crew members during ground operations and have the desired range of 480-800 km. When performing maneuvers from the ship to the coast and back, it must cover at least 22 km on the water at a maximum speed of 5-8 knots. In addition, the ACV must overcome open water with a wave height of 60 cm and a coastline with a surf height of 120-180 cm.
Phased approach
During a hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee in March 2015, ILC Commander General Joseph Dunford said that because within the allocated budget, the ILC had failed to develop an ACV capable of deploying from the deck of an amphibious assault ship, going ashore and conducting ground maneuvers at a satisfactory level instead, a phased approach was adopted.
“We've been working for a while to replace the 40-year-old Amphibious Assault Vehicle,” Dunford said. “And two years ago, we tried to combine protection appropriate for modern threats, the cost we could afford, and finally the ability to land off the coast or high-speed self-deployment. And it turned out that we cannot combine all three aspects. And so it was decided to split the program into three parts”.
“In the first phase 1.1, the immediate focus will be on ground combat vehicles with adequate protection for our foot soldiers on the shore … this vehicle will move from ship to shore in an amphibious assault vehicle. We expect our machines to operate ashore 90% of the time. That is, the first stage vehicle will be optimized for ground protection and movement on land."
Dunford went on to say: “In the second phase, we need to get a car with at least the same performance as the current veteran Amphibious Assault Vehicle. That is, it can be self-loading on a landing ship. And from that moment on, we decide to continue working on the self-deploying high-speed machine again, if by that time we combine the three variables that I have already mentioned."
He noted that another option is to simply continue to improve the second stage platform, that is, a machine with similar or better capabilities than the current AAV-7.
"But … the reason why we are where we are is because we simply could not combine these three things: cost, performance and protection needed against today's threats."
Patria AMV is the backbone of the Havoc machine - Lockheed Martin applications for the ACV 1.1 program
Promising results
Dunford was optimistic. Speaking about the current characteristics of the experimental machines, he noted that several machines showed themselves at a level corresponding to the next substage.
“I went to a test center in Nevada … to look at the current state of the machines. And to be honest, it was somewhat unexpected for me that things are quite normal. Although we requested a vehicle that simply provides ground mobility and is not necessarily a self-deploying vehicle, each bidder submitted a vehicle that is actually very close in performance to the requirements of the second sub-stage we are going to undertake.”
According to senior military commanders, applicants for the ILC ACV 1.1 program are starting to focus on the expected capabilities of the Increment 1.2 substage, suggesting that the two requirements will eventually merge.
Dunford noted that the biggest difference between step 1 and step 2 is the ability to deploy virtually independently from the ship, with no other means, stating that while the ILC intends to buy about 200 increment 1.1s and about 400 increment 1.2s. "It is quite possible that steps 1.1 and 1.2 can merge."
A total of four teams proposed ACV projects, including modified versions of the already produced 8x8 armored personnel carriers, which are in service: BAE Systems and Iveco with the SuperAV variant; General Dynamics with an upgraded version of the LAV 6.0, similar to the one operated by the Canadian military; SAIC and ST Kinetics with Terrex machine; and Lockheed Martin with an unknown platform, possibly a Havoc variant.
The Terrex proposal is most likely a modified version of the current platform, similar to the one in service with Singapore. The main advantages of this vehicle are its amphibious qualities and the possibility of future upgrades. According to the company, with a gross weight of 28,100 kg, the vehicle can unload from the landing craft to the shore and overcome the water section with wave heights up to 125 cm.
However, when asked to clarify details, all companies do not respond to requests and still avoid giving specific information to the media, citing secrecy.
The original car manufacturers only say that they are working to increase the speed of the car on land and on the water, as well as to improve mobility and underbody protection.
HAVOC creation
Meanwhile, Lockheed Martin, which had previously teamed up with Patria Land Systems to propose a variant of the AMV 8x8 called Havoc, has ended its partnership with the Finns and this "alliance" has disintegrated. The proposed variant was the standard AMV model; this vehicle is currently in service with the armed forces of Croatia, Finland, Poland, Slovenia, South Africa, Sweden and the United Arab Emirates.
Havoc develops a maximum highway speed of 105 km / h and has a cruising range of 900 km, on water it develops a speed of 5 knots with sea waves up to Sea State 2 (waves from 10 to 45 cm high).
Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control spokesman John Kent said the company was "completely committed to the ILC," but was cautious about the details of the proposed solution following its divorce from Finnish Patria.
“Lockheed Martin looks forward to delivering an ACV solution that has significant growth potential for all promising ACV options,” he added.
“Before Lockheed Martin submitted the ACV proposal, both Lockheed Martin and Patria agreed to end their partnership on this program. For competitive reasons, we are currently unable to disclose information on our offer."
Super car
Deepak Bazaz, Head of New & Amphibious Vehicles at BAE Systems, said the proposal for the ACV 1.1 combines the core performance of the SuperAV with the overall design approach adopted for the Iveco Centauro family of machines.
The SuperAV vehicle has a mass of 28,500 kg, develops a speed of 105 km / h on land and 6 knots on the water, and accommodates 13 infantrymen plus three crew members. She can unload from the landing ship at a distance of 18.5 km from the coast, travel 320 km overland and then return to the ship independently.
“Our job was that we adapted this solution for an amphibious platform project, we took a lot from Centauro, but this platform was really designed from the very beginning to be completely floating,” explained Bazaz.
“We looked at a lot of partners and some of them are still in the game today. But we chose Iveco, the best, in our opinion, because it has the richest experience in creating wheeled vehicles. It's one thing to take a ground vehicle and try to modify and prepare it to float on water. It's another thing to design a car from scratch and create it floating from the very beginning. And from the very beginning, we considered SuperAV only as a floating platform."
“The SuperAV machine was created floating and its center of gravity and all other important characteristics, for example, the buoyancy margin, that is, everything that is important for a floating vehicle, all these issues were resolved directly and immediately after the requirements were set. Iveco has a rich history, thousands and thousands of 4x4, 6x6, 8x8 vehicles, we looked at it and saw a good match with what we do."
Inborn abilities
He added that since the ACV is a truly amphibious solution, one of the most important characteristics of the new vehicle is its ability to land and return to the landing craft.
“These have to be inherent qualities,” he continued. - And no one understands this better than BAE Systems, since we are the main manufacturer of the current AAV machine for the ILC, for which the most important thing is the ability to unload and load the vehicle onto a ship and have good amphibious characteristics. Indeed, we have been producing AAV machines for decades, including for export, and we designed the first machine about 70 years ago. We definitely have a lot of experience and we use it in our solution for sub-step 1.1”.
Bazaz stated that the best solution for the ILC would be to get a fully finished, affordable car that would meet most of the threshold and target requirements, as the latter pave the way for the ACV 1.2 substage.
“Our proposal really responds to this. It is very affordable, as it is based on the price criteria defined by the Corpus, but we, for our part, are really in good shape. The most important stat for 1.2 is the ability to leave the ship, reach the shore and return to the ship. This requirement of Sub-Stage 1.2 - the ability to return to the ship - we have already demonstrated in trials."
The collaboration between BAE Systems and Iveco dates back to the Iveco MPC project, which ultimately became the forerunner of the current ACV program.
“The machine we proposed for the MPC program is very similar to the one we propose for the ACV 1.1 program. With this machine, we went through the MPC program and performed a full range of various tests, ranging from survivability tests, sea trials with thousands of kilometers traveled, tests at sea, and ending with unloading from and returning to the ship, '' Bazaz added. "It has performed very well in testing and has demonstrated that we can meet some of the future requirements." He noted that some of the requirements in the RFP for ACV resulted in minor modifications to the machine's design. In order to meet the requirements of ACV 1.1, the company has modified two positions: re-arranged the reserve volume in order to accommodate additional troops and changed the bottom booking in order to meet more stringent anti-explosive requirements.
“One of the reasons why we chose the Iveco vehicle was its growth potential and although we housed 10 people plus a crew of three in the MPC project, we realized that we could accommodate 13 troops in the car and we succeeded.”
Bazaz continued: “Therefore, we can carry additional cargo, place an infantry squad of 13 people inside. That is, the full squad necessary for the Corps, which can get out of the car and fight. And we still have a sufficient buoyancy reserve, a large enough part of the car looks out of the water and therefore there is no need to worry too much."
ST Kinetics' Terrex has already undergone challenging amphibious tests as part of the now closed MPC program.
Future requirements
In addition to the requirement for a capacity of 13 people, which is an integral part of the requirements for ACV 1.1, the vehicle must be capable of accepting additional functional systems and weapons systems, for example, a remotely controlled combat module (DUBM).
“This requirement has been defined and we have already demonstrated the ability to meet it in the MPC project. We analyzed what else we can do on this platform. The DBMS installation has already been calculated and we can afford it. Without a doubt, we can also provide MRAP levels of protection or even higher, and this will not degrade anything, since you are going to travel by land most of the time."
Regarding the expanding requirements of the ILC for a floating vehicle. Bazaz noted that the fundamental difference between the EFV program and the existing ACV project was the machine's ability to overcome long water obstacles.
“The fleet wants to stay far enough from the coast, but it will have ACV delivery vehicles to the coast or the same landing craft that will approach the coast closer than 12 nautical miles and drop these vehicles into the ocean. As for the previous EFV project, the ILC was going to land and cover the entire distance, but now it just lost its meaning, because there are new threats that the marines must now deal with."
Achievements of goals
Bazaz explained that the company's approach to the ACV competition is that sub-step 1.1 is viewed as a transitional one, and the machine must have redundancy from the outset in order to facilitate the transition to the next sub-step.
“We thought that to reduce the overall risk of the program - since we already had a mastered machine - the best approach would be to ensure the potential for upgrades and maintain alignment from the outset so that the transition from 1.1 to 1.2 would not require much rework. You do not need a significant technological break in this process, because each time you do it, you put the entire program at risk. That is, we are really working on substage 1.1, but at the same time we are accumulating all the opportunities for stage 1.2."
With regard to future contracts, they are expected in late 2015 or early 2016.
“Everything is based on getting Pentagon approval to issue a contract to two suppliers out of four applicants,” Bazaz added. - Under this program, the delivery of machines should begin nine months after the receipt of the contract. That is, most of the project and everything else needs to be done before the contract is received. Since we already have a solution in our hands, we carry out revision continuously and even now in order to prepare and meet the deadlines."
While the vehicle replacement program has begun to gain momentum, the ILC must simultaneously support the capabilities of the existing AAV-7 Amphibious Assault Vehicle, which most likely will not be removed from service until 2035.
“Since our company is the developer and manufacturer of the current AAV-7A1 combat vehicles, we plan to carry out some modernization,” Bazaz said. "Of course, we can call it modernization, but in reality it will do little to help these old machines."
“From the point of view of the philosophy of a floating car, I think the ILC understands that the ACV program is really what the modernization will start with. The AAVs do a great job as they make their way to the shore, but when they land on shore, real problems start and therefore, in order to eliminate all problems, the ILC accelerates the ACV 1.1 program, and then the 1.2 program."
