Let me give you a real deal 100% view of where Marine Corps armor is currently. Above you see the EFV. It was part of a plan that was developed by Marine Corps theorist for a new concept of operations that would see Marines launching assaults from over the horizon at lightly/undefended parts of shoreline, conducting the mission and either withdrawing or continuing on to a new target. High water speed was necessary in order to keep the Infantrymen from wearing down...10 hours in the water in the back of an AAV is not what you want your attacking force to face before an assault. It carried a 30mm Bushmaster capable of defeating other IFVs and their was talk of adding a "Trophy" type system to protect it from enemy anti-tank guided missiles.
It was the future.
It got canceled. In hindsight (my opinion here..for what its worth), the thing should have been canned five years into the program. If General Dynamics couldn't make it work or give the inkling of success then we should have walked away. As it is, we stayed. WE pumped millions...billions of dollars of taxpayer money into the vehicle...and on the cusp of success we discovered that it costs too damn much (HELLO F-35! Love ya, but if you're gonna break the bank then see ya!). Meanwhile. We have wars to fight. Meet the MTVR.
This brings us to the JLTV project. This vehicle will provide transport for at least a portion of the Marines infantry. Why the Marine Corps is so wedded to a project that will only provide a small portion of the required lift, will cost more than an upgraded (properly upgraded to include armor, suspension and engine) Humvee and will introduce an entirely new supply chain is beyond me.
Many have questioned the decision to proceed with a buy of around 5000 instead of simply upgrading the entire Humvee fleet but it appears the decision has been made. HQMC has never justified the thinking behind this project, they simply state that its a priority Marine Corps acquisition.
Above you see the SuperAv and the Havoc. These are the real candidates for the MPC contest and could start production quickly. The problem? The project is being placed on hold awaiting the outcome of the decision regarding the Amphibious Combat Vehicle. Both vehicles have been tested in the surf, both are capable, one is combat tested --- in essence, the Marine Corps has a bird in hand. Did I say that the program was delayed awaiting a decision on the ACV. Did I tell you that its been delayed at least twice since the EFV was canned? Did I also tell you that the current Commandant promised to drive a production version of the ACV before he left office? Yeah I still believe in Santa Claus too.
All this brings me to the last vehicle in this roundup.
The LVTP-7A2 (which should be the vehicle's proper designation) or the AAV as the Marine Corps now calls it.
This 40 plus year old vehicle has been gutted, upgraded, had armor slapped on it thats been around since the late 80's (does anyone even make EEAK anymore?) been subject to a frankenstein suspension lift (thank you US Army for allowing us to borrow the guts from the Bradley) and RUMOR has it that we're looking at MORE OF THE SAME.
The network is telling me that the game plan is to once again strip, rip and rebuild these vehicles, up-engine, up-suspension (you get my meaning), add more powerful thrusters, a new weapons package, SEND IT OUT TO THE FLEET AND RENAME IT ACV!
Quite honestly I'm hoping that my source for this information is smoking crack. The idea that we have the option of MPC sitting in front of us and will default to the ACV makes no sense.
The vacillation thats occurring at HQMC is telling though. The numbers have been crunched on the ACV at least 3 times according to my count and that excuse is getting old.
If you're wondering why I'm beginning to sour on the F-35 then this should explain it. We have mortgaged our future for the wing. When some grunt is lying in the mud trying to hold his intestines in and crying for his mother we can all point to this time and lay the blame at the feet of leadership. He's gut shot because his vehicle couldn't provide fire support. His vehicle couldn't provide fire support because it couldn't make it to the objective. It couldn't make it to the objective BECAUSE SOME DUMBASS THOUGHT IT WISE TO CONTINUE TO UPGRADE A VEHICLE THAT IS OVER 40 YEARS OLD!
We wouldn't continue to upgrade 40 year old aircraft (the exception being the B-52..but there is always an exception) so why are we willing to do it with our Armored Fighting Vehicles?
Truck mounted Marines are a Motor Rifle Regt, AAAV makes them amphibious Mechanized Rifles.
ReplyDeleteThe MPC just makes the a Mech Infantry with amphib capabilities.
I spent more time riding in a truck than any other vehicle besides full house LPD/LSD trucks are just more numerous and cheaper to use and if you control the road and the area you travel in a truck can do just fine.
I personally am glad they went to the LVPT-7 as opposed to upgrading the LVTP-5 which made a better range target than it did an APC, it did swim well but that was it's only good feature.
At one time these hulks were used as training aids parked in a line on the road to combat town at CLNC We were carried to the training area via truck, got out and crawled inside the stripped hulk of the LVTP-5 simulated an amphibious mechanized raid and debarked to continue our exercise on foot.
Browns Island target range had a few as Ant-tank targets for the 106's and Dragons.
Just to point out, along with the B-52... the C-130.
ReplyDeleteThose side armor attachments look so obsolete on Amtracks. Get some modular armor tiles for God’s sake. BTW I am really against another SLEP for AAVs. This is getting beyond absurdness. If acquiring a high end amphibious fighting vehicle is deemed unaffordable, then go for an all-wheeled armored force.
ReplyDeleteI love the MTVR. It is affordable, adaptable, reliable and durable. As you can tell by my MOS the MTVR is our workhorse and we love it. I would rather ride in MTVRs than AAVs.
ReplyDeleteFor the HMMWV I would rather have it just be replaced. I do not know if the JLTV is the answer but i really doubt keeping the frame rails while replacing the suspension, driveline and armored cab is going to help. The current bolt on armor of the HMMWV is a joke. It is the same flimsy body meant to hold canvas that we bolted thousands of pounds of armor too. They are death traps when hit because the frame warps under the armor plates. The Granite capsule is significantly better but we have not shown any interest in buying it. Why? Because the capsule makes the vehicle "permanently" heavier. For official planning purposes a uparmor weighs the same as one with canvas. The armor package is considered extra that will be bolted on at some point in the future. So a MV-22 can carry a stripped HMMWV, then another one can carry the armor, then after that one lands you can bolt the armor onto the truck and then go into combat. This is how we stay air mobile. Meanwhile back in reality I have never once seen a HMMWV, or MTVR for that matter, have the armor removed and then bolted back on at a later date. Even if the egnine blows up and needs depot level maintenance you trade one uparmor for another.
What I find ironic is that every senior officer pans the M-ATV as not a suitable vehicle for the USMC but everyone one of them will use it as their personal ride every chance they have, in either training and especially in Afghanistan.
Winners: MTVR, M-ATV, LAV-25, M1A1
Used to be good and now just old and needs to go: HMMWV, AAV7 series
Widely panned: ITV