via DoD Buzz
The U.S. Marine Corps has decided to shelve a planned upgrade of its Humvee fleet due to budget cuts, an official said.I don't understand.
The service had planned to modernize several thousand of the iconic military vehicles as part of an acquisition effort called the sustainment modification initiative (SMI). The effort was put on hold because of automatic, across-the-board spending reductions known as sequestration.
“The program was, in fact, terminated,” Bill Taylor, who oversees land systems for the service, told lawmakers Thursday during a hearing of the House Armed Services Committee on the Pentagon’s fiscal 2016 budget for ground force and helicopter modernization programs.
Both the Army and the Marine Corps are developing a Humvee replacement called the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle. But the new light-duty utility vehicle will only replace about a third of the Humvee fleet, meaning the Cold War-era design will remain in the inventory for decades to come.
The Corps’ modification initiative was aimed at upgrading some 6,700 Humvees known as the expanded capacity variant. The fourth-generation vehicles were modified to carry thousands of pounds of armor to protect troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, though they’re no longer driven outside the wire. The extra weight strained the suspension, engine and transmission systems.
Taylor said that while service leaders made a decision to sustain rather than upgrade the existing Humvee fleet, they may opt to pursue the enhancements if funding becomes available in the future. He was responding to a question from Rep. Tammy Duckworth, a Democrat from Illinois and a former Army helicopter pilot who lost both her legs while serving in Iraq.
“We were allowed to continue the nonrecurring effort associated with that program such that we have actually completed the development work and put three capability packages on the shelf,” he told lawmakers. “So, if in times of prosperity, the Marine Corps can return to those engineering proposals and reconsider instituting them in terms of procurement.”
The Recap program was MUCH cheaper than the JLTV, promised much increased protection, would eliminate the need to provide parts for TWO DIFFERENT vehicles and would save cube space aboard ship.
What makes the JLTV so attractive that the USMC is ignoring a good enough solution and going forward with a more expensive program?
If you know then hit me up but I fear we're seeing the dark side of joint programs. Once they're started you can't stop them if one of the partners deems it a "must have"...which begs the question. If the Marine Corps can't afford to upgrade its legacy humvees then how is it going to afford to buy 5k plus JLTVs?
Looking at the archives, the MC planned to upgrade 3,400+ Humvee at $180K max, for a total of $612 million funded in FY2016. They had to scrub it for lack of funds, they say.
ReplyDeleteIn FY2016 the MC plans to buy about fourteen faulty F-35B prototypes after declaring the B "combat capable" this coming July, 205. Next year 2016 is the year that the Air Force has IOC scheduled but General Welsh has said that the F-35's won't reach full combat capability until its most advanced software version, block 3F, begins to come online in 2017 (good luck on that). The Navy isn't going with "combat capability" until 2018.
So next year the MC plans to spend about $3 billion (14X200+) for faulty useless F-35s but won't be able to spend $612 million for necessary ground vehicles. (The other services are also buying these turkeys but w/o declaring them combat capable. Go figure.)
Seeing this the JTLV should be cancelled immediately. A humvee recap program should be started, since we have thousands in inventory.
ReplyDeleteOff topic but Same thing with the bradley, just move the fuel tanks to the rear and out of the vehicle like they planned and keep the busk III and add a remote 30mm weapons station, no need for a new vehicle.
M1 just add the damn diesel engine done. Fleet modernization and recap done if we include the AMPV.
If the marines would just buy a LCU they could use the same vehicles across the board.
agree with all but your last. the only vehicle that the USMC MUST HAVE that is service unique is the AAV replacement. everything else we can "make do" but the AAV replacement is a must. as a sidenote i'm not so sure about not needing an upgrade to the Bradley. the Bradley's served well but its getting long in the tooth and in my opinion an upgrade is necessary.
ReplyDeleteI agree they need an AAV replacement, at this point just stick with the lower cost EFV idea is my opinion. Also if you are going to replace the bradley you should hold off on the AMPV and have a common family of vehicles in my opinion, the economies of scale should in theory make it worth it. What new technologies are the vehicle going to provide that doesn't make keeping the bradley worth it cost wise? Once you take out the turret bustle then a 9 man squad fits plus the 3 man crew. Taking the lessons learned from Iraq I truly doubt there is a better protected infantry vehicle.
ReplyDeleteOfftopic
ReplyDeleteBRDM vs. Saxon AT105 hill-climb test
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f9MsyHtKwZ4&t=144
I think we can put off any major upgrades to the BFV until we need to field an entirely new line of fighting vehicles as long as we keep up the "incremental component upgrade" program that we've been doing.
ReplyDeleteThe Bradley cannon is being looked at for an upgrade to 30mm at Benning right now, although I think we should just skip straight to ATK's 40mm upgrade.. The TOW system is getting wireless missiles because ALL TOWs are going wireless. The comms package was just updated after the Force XXI trials proved them. The only real complaint anyone has is that the hulls are getting a bit old, but so far they are holding up pretty well.
As far as I know, all BFVs have been upgraded to the M2A3 standard, so unless you want to add the "BUSK" or "Bradley Urban Survival Kit" across the board, there isn't much more that we can do with our current level of technology and inventory that makes sense.
".... Call me Ishmael" 10 to 1 It's a Scifi rewrite of Moby dick... But Since I love Moby, I'll Buy.
ReplyDeleteBut they are not getting an AAV replacement, they are at best augmenting it. Why waste money on the ACV when they have even said that ACV's would never be part of first wave assaults?
ReplyDelete*Side note: I would love for them to replace the AAV but they are DEAD SET not to and in that case, I would rather put the ACV money to use elsewhere since investing in that vehicle won't make a difference in getting rid of the AAV.
Sol, this is the same problem that exists with the F35, a program that was "thought" to death before it even began, was pushed as the "next big thing", and is now "too big to fail".
ReplyDeleteThe JLTV spooled up around 2006/2007, at that time, GD and BAE were already producing RG series MRAPs that were lighter than others (Force Protection Cougar, Navistar MaxxPro, BAE Caiman Series). 2010 saw MRAPs getting lighter and the introduction of the MATV (which we all know is basically the same a the JLTV contenders, about 2-3 tons heavier if that).
Long story short, the JLTV was massively outpaced by industry as they catered to consumer demands and started producing lighter weight MRAPs.
Another part of the problem is the perception that the HMMWV is a bad vehicle, it is not, but it was never designed to be used as it was and the short term solution was to add armor. Everyone knows that those additions taxed HMMWVs far beyond their limits and no shit that led to limited effectiveness. People don't understand that these HMMWV "Upgrades" are actually redesigns which completely change the design of the vehicle so that it is suited for use in front-line combat, they are not simply the "armor additions" of long ago.
"The Recap program was MUCH cheaper than the JLTV"
ReplyDeleteMaybe this is the problem, someone want more cash for this the less...
My fantasy is for the Army to field a IFV to get its 9 troop capacity back from the Bradley. That is something that probably will never happen. Im not sure what kind of capacity the AMPV offers without the turret getting in the way either.
ReplyDeleteAnd of course, the marines actually seeing a new AAV (or ACV whatever you want to call it) before 2030. Something that doesn't compromise on troop capacity or firepower. And, for gods sake, a vehicle with MGS, NLOS mortar, and SPAAG variants to go with it.
I know the ECP V2 Abrams, per GDLS website, is supposed to transition to a MTU-licensed diesel (among numerous other things). Im not sure what will come to that. http://www.gdls.com/index.php/products/modernization/abrams