The original EFV prototypes were found to be unreliable after testing in 2006. In January 2009, the Pentagon approved subsequent revisions by contractor General Dynamics and issued a permit for the manufacture and testing of new prototypes. However, for financial reasons, the EFV project was canceled in 2011
The Marine Corps plan to create a promising amphibious force that would become a "crisis response force" is again in the air as funding for all projects has been cut
The core business model of the United States Marine Corps (USMC) will shift in the future from ground operations and counterinsurgency tactics in Iraq and Afghanistan over the past decade to the so-called “crisis response force” of the United States. In part, this entails the search for lighter weight solutions for various military equipment so that at the right time the infantrymen can again focus on deployment from the US Navy ships.
The Marines have many deployment methods in their arsenal and still purchase the MV-22 Osprey tiltrotor for fast and long-range expedition missions. However, when carrying out amphibious operations requiring infantry to maneuver from ship to shore, the USMC still relies on the 70s Amphibious Assault Vehicle (AAV) amphibious assault vehicles, which it has been trying to replace for quite some time.
In 2011, the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle (EFV) program, which was supposed to replace the outdated AAV, was closed after about $ 3 billion was spent on development and several prototypes were made.
Pentagon officials estimate that an additional $ 12 billion is needed to refine and purchase this machine. This figure led at the time the head of the Pentagon Robert Gates and the command of the USMC to the conclusion that the new amphibious vehicle was simply too expensive.
The Corps then took advantage of the open budget framework and extended the timeline to create a three-pronged approach for its amphibious vehicle portfolio. First, there will be a medium modernization of part of the AAV fleet in order to maintain combat capabilities until the next generation vehicle appears; second, the Amphibious Combat Vehicle (ACV) amphibious combat vehicle will be developed as a replacement for the previous EFV; and finally third, the deployment of a fleet of 579 new Marine Personnel Carrier (MPC) armored personnel carriers will be accelerated, which will complement the fleet of new ACV vehicles.
Currently, even this contingency plan has undergone significant revision due to the increasingly unclear financial prospects.
In March 2013, a "revision" of budget lines was carried out, according to which defense spending could be cut by a total of $ 500 billion by 2021, unless Congress and the White House agree on a budget agreement and change regulations. For now, there is little agreement between Democrats and Republicans, and budget cuts can be implemented. In this regard, the USMC has reduced its appetite for plans for the procurement of equipment.
“The MPC project is currently off the agenda,” US ILC Commander General James Amos told reporters in June 2013.
“You cannot act on the principle“Since this turned out to be not a very good idea, then the need for it immediately disappears.”But, you cannot have everything at once. Therefore, we made a decision regarding the MPC project, perhaps we will keep the project afloat, but … we are not focusing our efforts on the implementation of the MPC project at this time."
Corps spokesman Manny Pacheco said the Marines had tested four proposed platforms to assess buoyancy, survivability and "human factors." For example, the number of people placed in the car (the requirements say nine infantry and two crew members) and how to pack equipment.
He reported that all four vehicles performed well in all aspects of testing, including explosive testing at the Nevada Test Center.
Pacheco noted that the tests showed “four workable machines” and therefore the ILC are confident that if, in the end, the MPC project returns, then it can be relatively easily moved forward. In October, the government sent out test reports to each manufacturer.
In August 2012, the USMC awarded four contracts worth approximately $ 3.5 million to each of the teams led by BAE Systems, General Dynamics Land Systems (GDLS), Lockheed Martin and SAIC.
Lockheed Martin jointly with Finnish Patria Land Systems introduced the Havoc 8x8, which is based on the Patria AMV (Armored Modular Vehicle); it is currently in service with several European countries.
BAE Systems and Iveco jointly presented a version of the SuperAV 8x8 wheeled vehicle developed by the Italian company; SAIC, together with Singapore's ST Kinetics, presented a platform based on the Terrex 8x8 armored personnel carrier, which is in service with the Singapore army.
GDLS was particularly reticent about its proposal and even denied participation in the program until mid-2013. In June, the company released a statement that its offering is based on the LAV III family of vehicles and includes a double V-hull (DVH). GDLS manufactures these reinforced hulls for the US Army's Stryker wheeled vehicles under an exchange program.
The MPC was supposed to have levels of protection comparable to those of machines of the MRAP class (with increased protection against mines and improvised explosive devices) and weigh about 20-25 tons. A reinforced rifle squad should be located in two MPC vehicles, that is, an MPC company could in this case transfer an infantry battalion with the participation of its standard wheeled means. These machines, although not floating, must nevertheless cross rivers, waterways and overcome light surf, since it is assumed that after unloading from the landing craft they will operate on the coast near the landing site.
Patria Land Systems and Lockheed Martin have teamed up under the MPC program (currently suspended indefinitely) and presented an AMV vehicle with a Kongsberg Protector remotely controlled weapon station
Floating combat vehicle Amphibious Combat Vehicle
While the MPC project has been suspended indefinitely as part of the long-term plans to re-equip the US ILC, officials have high hopes for the deployment of a new amphibious vehicle under the ACV program.
However, the marines are very careful in the implementation of the ACV program, as they are afraid of the collapse of the second project, which may mean the cancellation of general needs. For this purpose, various studies were carried out in which all possible replacements of delivery vehicles from ship to shore were studied.
An analysis of alternatives was completed in June 2012 by the Department of Defense with active involvement of the US Navy and the USMC. Several options were considered in this analysis, including transporting ground vehicles to shore by means such as a hovercraft, instead of using a floating vehicle.
General Amos said the analysis of the alternatives "confirmed the need for a floating vehicle … some type of surface capability that you could use … in a combat environment for an assault landing."
However, this analysis did not consider water speed, and this was the main factor that determined the cost of the EFV, which was supposed to "glide" on the water and thus reach speeds of up to 28 knots.
In the fall of 2013, the US ILC carried out a final study of the ACV's possible floating speeds, which confirmed which characteristics are technologically and financially feasible.
“I made a request to the industry and asked them to go back, using what we have left from the EFV project and all the experience we have in making the current machines, and tell us what their best offer is regarding the ability to make the planned machine. They are going to come back to me this fall and then we will decide on the ACV,”General Amos said in June 2013.
“They will let me know about it in the fall, and immediately after the new 2014, we will issue a request for proposals,” he said.
Once the review is complete, the ILC “will know exactly what the requirements are, as well as the order of how much it might cost. Cost is a variable for me in this case,”added General Amos.
During the early planning stages of the ACV program, the Marines expected to buy 573 platforms at a price of $ 12 million apiece. In this case, the platform should have a mass of approximately 31,751 kg and develop a speed of up to 8 knots on the water with a cruising range of about 12 miles (22 km) from the coastline.
In May 2013, Deputy Commander for Combat Development, General Richard Mills, said the ACV's maximum water speed would "exceed 15 knots," of course, if it was decided to go in that direction.
“This has several benefits: less time in the water… faster movement from ship to shore, the ability to move ships farther out to sea to avoid threats from shore,” he told the Senate Defense Committee's naval subcommittee.
“It also gives you cruising range and the ability to get past enemy defenses and enemy coasts where you don't want to land,” General Mills expressed his opinion on the faster option. "The increase over current capabilities is enormous."
General Amos said the USMC will decide on these requirements following industry reports on cost and a trade-off between lifting capacity and platform speed on the water. “We will take the decision as a basis right at the beginning of 2014 and say 'ok, we are going to have a displacement vehicle or a vehicle with a high floating speed,” he added.
A displacement type vehicle moves on the water surface, but cannot go to the redan (planing) and, therefore, its speed is limited by its mass or displacement. Obsolete Marine Corps AAV vehicles are considered displacement type vehicles.
Distinguished Veteran of the AAV
Almost 400 AAV (Amphibious Assault Vehicle) Marine Corps can be upgraded or maintained, which will undoubtedly increase their capabilities and survivability.
According to Pacheco, "at least four players are conducting research and development to determine what can be done to extend the life of the machines they deserve."
He said the Marine Corps issued a request for information to understand what could be done, as upgrades cannot be limited to better armor and seats as any added mass could affect buoyancy and would theoretically require new suspension, track, transmission. etc. However, the current engine is relatively powerful and its replacement is not necessary.
The power unit based on the Cummins VT400 diesel engine was installed on the cars in the 80s during their modernization to the current version of the AAV7A1.
The next step of the ILC under the AAV program will be the issuance of a request for proposals, which is scheduled to be published at the end of 2014.
The AAV entered service in 1972 and is still the primary support armored personnel carrier for the Marines. While the Marines await their new amphibious tractor, the AAV should remain in service until at least 2030.
To extend the life of the AAV7Al variant, the USMC is considering plans to modernize 392 vehicles in the armored personnel carrier variant, along with the possible modernization of the commander and evacuation options. New survivability technologies will be integrated into the vehicle, weight will be optimized, buoyancy will be improved and combat stability will be increased.
According to the Advanced Technology Investment Plan [ATIP] 2013, the USMC would like to see “technologies that provide advantages in ceramics and multilayer armor” with the aim of increasing survivability while maintaining mass. The document says that survivability decisions are likely to require "internal and external underbody armor", as well as anti-explosive seats and anti-splinter liners.
In terms of weight, ATIP notes that increasing the vehicle's survivability is likely to increase its weight as well. In this regard, the Marines say they have a "critical need" for lightweight materials and "design improvements to improve buoyancy and protection." The Marine Corps is also looking for technologies "to improve reliability and reduce operating and maintenance costs."
While the program is yet to be formally adopted, several investment opportunities (some of which are currently funded) have been identified in ATIP related to the modernization of the AAV. This upgrade includes: modular lightweight booking system, DARPA Advanced Research Projects Vehicle Adaptation Project, self-tightening fuel tanks, active laser shielding system, advanced transmission, lightweight modular external fuel tanks, emergency escape capability, high strength / high viscosity nanocomposite materials, extended track life, etc.
For fiscal 2014, the USMC has requested funds for upgrades. At the same time, the start of the design and development phase is expected, within which six prototypes will be manufactured.
Prototype testing is scheduled for late 2015 with production starting at the end of next year. If all goes according to plan, then the upgraded AAV machines will begin to enter service at the end of the 2018 financial year, and their full combat readiness is expected no earlier than 2022.
As for the current modernization, in the short term, the program to improve the AAV will require a doubling of the original budget. In order to continue purchasing components and modernizing the fleet of these machines for 2014, $ 32.4 million was requested. For example, new intercom systems will be purchased to replace outdated VIC-II systems, on-board computers and software for them, the throttle control levers and rods will be refined, and built-in emergency exit lighting will be installed.
The USMC considers its highest priority not only to replace the fleet of outdated AAVs, but possibly also a program to extend the life of these floating "veterans"
Joint Light Tactical Vehicle Project
In order to enhance its capabilities for protected maneuver on land, the USMC plans to purchase 5,500 new Joint Light Tactical Vehicles (JLTV) light tactical vehicles as replacements for its HMMWV jeeps, which are no longer used outside military bases in theaters due to their vulnerability to roadside bombs. directional action).
However, for a long time the infantrymen hesitated to buy a larger, heavier and potentially more expensive vehicle, as they seek to restore their expeditionary capabilities.
The former commander of the ILC, James Conway, often expressed fears that a heavier platform would not be able to meet the basic requirements of the infantrymen, and he pointed to the need for a lighter vehicle that could be carried inside a helicopter or on its suspension. Conway once said that the Corps would not buy cars if they weigh 20,000 pounds (9,070 kg).
Weight issues, in general, have been resolved, the proposed JLTV machines can be transported in a helicopter or on its suspension. The 2012 White House Defense Guidelines emphasize that funding for JLTV should be protected, but US ILC commanders talked about ongoing budgetary concerns, suggesting a shift in priority for the program.
“I tell everyone you have to keep the cost down, and I'm not going to buy this,” General Amos said in June. "Given all the reductions, I would say this is a subject for consideration."
The JLTV was originally priced at approximately $ 300,000 before the shielding and functional kits were installed, but the program then changed requirements to bring the average manufacturing cost per unit below $ 250,000 (2011 prices) across the family. The average purchase price should be significantly higher as the program also needs to factor in the cost of new training equipment, machine deployments, spare parts, various kits, and other systems.
A corps spokesman explained in July 2013 that the entire JLTV program, considering development and production, is expected to be worth approximately $ 30 billion (in 2012 prices).
Over the next 20-25 years, the US military plans to buy approximately 49,000 JLTV vehicles, but the Marines expect to complete purchases of these vehicles by 2022, as their budget will be focused on purchasing ACVs by then. If budget cuts remain unchanged and financial problems arise, then the hull will not abandon the floating conveyor for a new car.
“We need them, I like them, but if there is a full 10% sequestration [of planned annual budgets], then I doubt if I can afford JLTV,” General Amos said. "I will take my HMMWV armored vehicles, send them to the factory, to the workshop and receive my seven-ton trucks before the ACV floating combat vehicle project begins."
In August 2012, JLTV's current EMD phase was awarded contracts to teams led by AM General, Lockheed Martin and Oshkosh. In August 2013, each of them submitted 22 prototypes for a test period that includes an assessment of technical characteristics, reliability and survivability, lasting 14 months, which began in September 2013.
Programming changes during the EMD phase may occur, but JLTV Project Manager Colonel John Cavedo believes any changes to requirements will be “minimal”. Cavedo hopes that the final approval of requirements for JLTV will take place in late 2014 or early 2015. Also in 2015, the program is scheduled to be approved by the Pentagon, and the publication of the final request for proposals and the selection of only one contractor.
Meanwhile, the USMC is planning to launch a so-called Life Extension Initiative (SMI), which means extending the life of approximately 13,000 HMMWVs until 2030. According to this plan, the Marine Corps fleet of 24,000 HMMWV armored vehicles will be reduced to about 18,500 units and ultimately 5,500 of them will be replaced by new JLTVs. According to the ATIP Investment Plan, SMI plans to “restore the safety, performance and reliability capabilities of the existing ECV variant of the HMMWV”.
The ECV is the latest variant of the HMMWV to remain in service. Only a few of the safety, performance and mobility components will be updated in line with the current plans. The list of components contributing to increasing survivability for the ECV variant was determined later, at the end of 2013.
AM General joins rivals Lockheed Martin and Oshkosh with its BRV-0 project in the next phase of the JLTV vehicle development
Unanswered questions
With the political establishment in Washington unable to break the two-year budgetary impasse, the USMC and other branches of the military are preparing for a future in which sequestration continues to “cover” defense budgets and forces the military to further cut its size and its purchases.
Budget cuts, which stem from the Pentagon's decision to cut its future requests by $ 487 million ahead of time, forced the Marine Corps to cut its final active duty personnel from the current 194,000 to 182,000.
General Amos suggested in June 2013 that if the sequestration continued, the corps would "have to cut another 8,000 men," which would bring the final number to 174,000 infantry. The corps has 27 regular infantry battalions (battalion size is approximately 800-1000 infantry), therefore, these reductions will reduce the number of battalions to 23.
As General Amos explained, the reserve component of the US ILC will remain at the level of 39,600 people, since in the past decade the number of the reserve has not grown, unlike the size of the rest of the corps.
Pentagon officials in late July revealed recommendations from a secret analysis of strategic alternatives to SCMR, which explored a wide range of future budgetary options. According to him, the corps in the most dramatic scenarios, for the most part, will remain as it is.
However, if we take into account 10 years of sequestration, then in accordance with the most likely scenario proposed in the SCMR, the USMC will be reduced from 182,000 people to about 150,000-175,000 people.
"Lost in the Bose" project EFV
