How can the Army's Ground Combat Vehicle program be so far ahead of the Marine Corps Amphibious Combat Vehicle effort?
Oh that's right...THE ARMY DOESN'T HAVE A BILLION PLUS DOLLAR AIRPLANE WRAPPED AROUND ITS NECK.
Historians will look back at the F-35 program and declare it the cause of the demise of the Marine Corps and the weakening of the Commandant's office.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIs this based on the CV-90 or is it the 80 ton monster everyone talks about?
ReplyDeleteI heard somewere that BAE would propose a variant of the CV-90...is it TRUE?
the army wanted unique so BAE is still working on that 80 ton beast. what the Army should be trying to get ahold of is the Armadillo that the Dutch are considering.
DeleteMaybe it's why the US Army Should have gone with a CV-90 or IDF's Namer IFV
ReplyDeleteSol, you mean the Danes. The Dutch just shitcanned their armor a few years ago, the dumbfucks.
ReplyDeleteAnyways, the Army hasn't caught up to the fact it can't afford a program from scratch. It's best to go with an off-the-shelf solution like the CV90 for GCV and the Armadillo for the AMPV and save the R&D costs for active defenses, etc.
The CBO's study was right and Army is going to face the same budget crunches. of course, they'll probably cut a few BCTs to afford it, the morons. Why is our military so fucked in the head and hell bent on spending us into oblivion?
i think its because during the wins in the first Gulf War they were staff pushing paper instead of leading men....they're stupid because despite the years of service they have no experience where it counts.
DeleteBefore you blame the F-35 again, there is talk now about this being kicked down the road as well. The GCV program just took a budget haircut.
ReplyDeleteIn defense of the Army they actually finally figured out that they need a full squad aboard their IFV. This requirement of GCV is important. It requires a new or stretched vehicle. There is no off the shelf 9 man dismount carrying IFV available. The Namer has excellent MBT level protection and mobility (and is made in Ohio) but is not an IFV. That said at $3 million under present production numbers I'd bet a 30mm/7.62mm RWS version would end up under $3 million. Even allowing it to get to $4.333 million with every bell and whistle we're still talking 1/3rd of what the Army says it will spend on GCV.
ReplyDeleteAnd now the 3 million dollar question.
ReplyDeleteWhy does the Army need new MBTs NOW? Something inherently wrong with the Abrams or is the Army feeling a bit left out with the USMC and USAF (theoretically) getting new toys? And in the middle of a recession too.
Or is this going to be another paper study like the USMC MPC and EFV? Which I suspect it is going to be. For one, there is no immediate need for replacement, two, there is a budget cut going on and three, there are a lot of other projects that have a higher priority than a GCV and still can't get funding.
The US doesn't seem to be having much luck with defence procurements these recent years.
There is an off the shelf 9 man dismount carrying IFV - the PUMA IFV. CBO said a PUMA would carries just 6 dismounts but that is wrong. PUMA for German Army carries just 6 dismounts because that is the size of a German fire team. There is a huge rack for gear inside the PUMA occupying the space of at least 2 dismounts. If US Army can fit 7 dismounts into one Bradley they can easily fit one additional dismount behind the driver within the PUMA and without the rack 9 dismounts fit in one PUMA.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.rommelkiste.de/Fahrzeuge/Puma/Puma.html
http://www.panzergrenadierbataillon52.de/imgdb/details.php?image_id=438
Did anyone noticed that the BAE GCV will have a big blind spot at the rear due to the engines located at the back? Also just one GCV will fit in a C-5 Galaxy or 3 PUMA.
mhal, thought the GCV was engine front? Most AFVs with intergrated fireteams are engine front designs for the rear infantry bay doors. You sure you are not looking at it backwards?
ReplyDeleteThe GCV is the F-35 of the army.
ReplyDelete