Friday, May 17, 2013

If you can't sell the need, you can't get the vehicle.



via Defense News.
US Special Operations Command plans to award a contract this August for the closely watched Ground Mobility Vehicle 1.1 (GMV) program, as opposed to making an award this month, said USMC Lt. Col. Ken Burger, program manager for the Family of Special Operations Vehicles.
The command wants to buy 1,297 new GMVs to replace the current 1,072 Humvee-based GMVs it has in its inventory. As Defense News has reported, the plan is to spend about $24 million on the program in fiscal 2014 for the first 101 vehicles.
Go to Defense News to read the whole story but its rather simple.

SOCOM hasn't made the case of why they need this vehicle.  Quite honestly what will this rig do that the modified HUMMVEEs and Prowlers won't?

SOCOM cheerleaders can get all excited, but they haven't.  You can talk about our Special Operators deserving the best gear possible but we live in budgets.  That's just not realistic talk...especially when unit funds go towards paying for expensive watches and I-Pads.

SOCOM will offer up this vehicle to the budget Gods and state proudly that just like everyone else they're cutting back.  It'll be pure and utter bullshit but they'll be looked at as Saints because of it.

6 comments :

  1. Actually SOCOM is preparing not one but two separate vehicle programs. The one you are talking about is a HUMVEE sized tactical vehicle aka GMV. There is another requirement for a smaller vehicle that can be fit inside V-22. Ironically it's also called ITV (ha!)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. GMV is the one that got delayed and is the one i'm talking about but quite honestly they can't justify either one.

      Delete
  2. Yeah not a lot of love for the ITV either.

    Honestly we would have been better off pulling the old WWII Willy's out of the crates putting in a new diesel engine and driving that around. At least then it would be cheap not cost the 120,000 we pay per ITV. AKA the smurf cart.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. i'm trying to find the need but i can't find of one instance where a helo raid was conducted where an ITV type vehicle was actually used. i can only find artillery raids being done during Gulf War 1. do you know of any others????

      Delete
    2. The only recent artillery raids were during desert storm. The risk is too high to do that now especially when we have HIMARS and air to conduct counter battery. Also we developed BBDPICM to improve our cannon counter battery capability. My last Reg CO stated, that as long as he was the CO our cannons and trucks would never be separated. His opinion was air was too unreliable to count on to pick the guns back up and it takes too long anyway. So to answer one of your earlier blog posts, yes the artillery raid is dead. While we still sling load the guns it is not really for artillery raids.

      The concept for the ITV is that during a MEB-MEF level assault we will conduct an amphibious air assault over the horizon, ship to objective maneuver, with a full infantry BN supported by a Expeditionary Fire Support System (EFS) battery all transported internally in MV-22. Additionally CH-53E and CH-53K will sling load JLTVs that will carry the CAAT teams.

      The problem with this is the numbers of flight needed versus the number of flights available. I do not want to calculate what you need to transport an entire infantry BN in MV-22 but you need a minimum of 15 and preferably 17 MV-22 loads just for the EFS battery. All this to have six 120mm mortars each with 70 rounds of ammo and a range of 8200 meters on a really good day.

      The upside of the EFS is that you have the smurf cart and are thus capable of displacing. With the M777A2 you are stuck exactly where they drop you and whatever ammo you have is also stuck on the deck where it was dropped. At 100lbs per shell no one is carrying 155 far. So by comparison the ITV and EFS is a step up compared to the M777A2 where you have no ability to maneuver. How do you do maneuver warfare when you cannot maneuver?

      Delete
  3. A have little 'inside baseball' from an acquaintance who worked this program. SOCOM has been trying to piggy-back off of other vehicle programs for a decade but none of those either produced a vehicle or produced a vehicle that can meet their requirements. I am told that the balanced mix of being "combat ready" with main weapon operable within 60 seconds of hitting the dirt, carrying the required number of fully equipped operators, up-armor options for certain situations, and being able to move fast over terrain that Hummers have to crawl over and having 'long range' while still being able to transport in a CH-47 is a tough one. Frankly, I'm surprised at the vehicles that have supposedly been 'down-selected': they don't look like they'll fit in a -47 even if they can collapse the suspensions for transport, and I doubt their range is very good.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.