Hasik gets it wrong.

Big Time Hat Tip to Jonathan for sending me this article!

Hasik is a defense analyst with a big following inside the beltway.  He's one of the 'inside' guys so I was surprised by how wrong he was in his latest analysis of the Amphibious Combat Vehicle program.  Read his entire post here, but a tidbit....

Rather, the general was describing two possible ways forward after the EFV:1. A landing force carried entirely in ACVs.
2. A mix of ACVs and wheeled vehicles, with the latter borne by hovercraft or displacement landing craft.
So, there's no exotic two-part vehicle under consideration, and as I suggested yesterday was possible. Indeed, the second option—the two-parter, it would seem—is actually a rather tried-and-true approach. Plenty of other amphibious forces have amphibious tractors (usually AAV7s from BAE Systems) and hovercraft (often from Griffon), and those that don't definitely know how to drive ashore in landing craft with bow ramps.
This merely reinforces my assertion yesterday about the competitive way forward for industry, though I will extend my remarks slightly:
First, the Navy's follow-on hovercraft, the Ship-to-Shore Connector (SSC), should have a secure future. If one really wants to stand over the horizon for an amphibious assault, helicopters and hovercraft are the technically proven way to do it. Hovercraft admittedly aren't as robust under fire as AAVs, but then again, neither are helicopters. And, with both helicopters and hovercraft, the assault force can have options for going where the enemy isn't.
Second, the emphasis on wheeled vehicles, hauled ashore by SSCs or displacement landing craft, means that the Marine Personnel Carrier program will likely continue in the Corps's plans. After all, the Marines had mostly been thinking about proven designs—Nexter's VBCI, ARTEC's Boxer, GD's LAV-V, and Patria's AMV—with modifications for their particular requirements. Those are reasonably priced vehicles whose long-term costs are well-established. They're not EFVs or GCVs, so there's no reason to get worked up a priori about affordability.

My opinion, but Hasik is missing the real debate here.

1.  The ACV is going forward.  The Marines will have a follow on to the AAV. 
2.  The proposal to have a mixed force arose because the EFV was so expensive.
3.  With the EFV canceled and the ACV replacing it, the idea of a mixed force loses its luster.  The Marine Corps has in essence placed the Marine Personnel Vehicle on hold until studies can be determined as to whether it makes sense to purchase two vehicles instead of one.
4.  His attempt to link the SSC to future amphibious assault doctrine is a misnomer.  In no plans have I read that the SSC will be used in the assault phase.  He can compare the survivability of the SSC to aircraft but there is no comparison.  The SSC is a relative sitting duck.
5.  He goes on to make the statement that the Marines might be interested in a high speed LCVP for landing personnel.  Not bloody likely.  The Marines are tailoring themselves as the medium weight force of the US.  Buying high speed LCVPs would put us in the role of Commandos.  It ain't happening.

In all I'm just disappointed but not surprised.  Naval analyst usually have a hard time with Marine Corps issues.  What is annoying is that he and others like him have the ear of policy makers.  And that is a club that has benefits and no entry without membership.  And thats the shame of it.

Unless the Marine Corps gets its message out then those that don't know it, don't understand it or purposefully want to misrepresent it are going to be heard.

We can't let that happen.

Tracks gets back to their roots.

MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE, N.C.-Marines with 2nd Assault Amphibian Battalion, 2nd Marine Division, ready themselves to enter the water in their amphibious assault vehicle during amphibious training operations aboard Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune, N.C., August 4, 2011. The Marines train each year to brush up on their old techniques and tactics, as well as learn new ones. During this operation, the Marines had the cooperation of USS Ponce, an Austin-Class amphibious transport dock, and USS Oak Hill, a Harpers Ferry-class dock landing ship. After launching from the beach, the Marines boarded the ship with the help of their vehicles., Pvt. Brian M. Woodruff, 8/4/2011 4:26 AM

MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE, N.C.-Marines with 2nd Assault Amphibian Battalion, 2nd Marine Division, ready themselves to enter the water in their amphibious assault vehicles during amphibious training operations aboard Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune, N.C., August 4, 2011. The Marines train each year to brush up on their old techniques and tactics, as well as learn new ones. During this operation, the Marines had the cooperation of USS Ponce, an Austin-Class amphibious transport dock, and USS Oak Hill, a Harpers Ferry-class dock landing ship. After launching from the beach, the Marines boarded the ship with the help of their vehicles. , Pvt. Brian M. Woodruff, 8/4/2011 4:27 AM

MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE, N.C.-Marines with 2nd Assault Amphibian Battalion, 2nd Marine Division, prepare to enter the water in their amphibious assault vehicle during amphibious training operations aboard Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune, N.C., August 4, 2011. The Marines train each year to brush up on their old techniques and tactics, as well as learn new ones. During this operation, the Marines had the cooperation of USS Ponce, an Austin-Class amphibious transport dock, and USS Oak Hill, a Harpers Ferry-class dock landing ship. After launching from the beach, the Marines boarded the ship with the help of their vehicles. , Pvt. Brian M. Woodruff, 8/4/2011 4:15 AM

MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE, N.C.-Marines with 2nd Assault Amphibian Battalion, 2nd Marine Division, enter the water in their amphibious assault vehicle during amphibious training operations aboard Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune, N.C., August 4, 2011. The Marines train each year to brush up on their old techniques and tactics, as well as learn new ones. During this operation, the Marines had the cooperation of USS Ponce, an Austin-Class amphibious transport dock, and USS Oak Hill, a Harpers Ferry-class dock landing ship. After launching from the beach, the Marines boarded the ship with the help of their vehicles. , Pvt. Brian M. Woodruff, 8/4/2011 4:22 AM

YAT-YAS onboard the USS Whidbey Island.

An amphibious assault vehicle with Marines assigned to the 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit returns to the well deck of the amphibious dock landing ship USS Whidbey Island. The Whidbey Island is deployed as part of the Bataan Amphibious Ready Group, participating in the Spanish Amphibious Landing Exercise off the coast of Spain. (Photo by: Petty Officer 3rd Class Desiree D. Green)

An amphibious assault vehicle with Marines assigned to the 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit returns to the well deck of the amphibious dock landing ship USS Whidbey Island. The Whidbey Island is deployed as part of the Bataan Amphibious Ready Group, participating in the Spanish Amphibious Landing Exercise off the coast of Spain. (Photo by: Petty Officer 3rd Class Desiree D. Green)

An amphibious assault vehicle with Marines assigned to the 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit returns to the well deck of the amphibious dock landing ship USS Whidbey Island. The Whidbey Island is deployed as part of the Bataan Amphibious Ready Group, participating in the Spanish Amphibious Landing Exercise off the coast of Spain. (Photo by: Petty Officer 3rd Class Desiree D. Green)

An amphibious assault vehicle with Marines assigned to the 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit returns to the well deck of the amphibious dock landing ship USS Whidbey Island. The Whidbey Island is deployed as part of the Bataan Amphibious Ready Group, participating in the Spanish Amphibious Landing Exercise off the coast of Spain. (Photo by: Petty Officer 3rd Class Desiree D. Green)

EFV will come back...

This story by Fabey illustrates a private thought that I've had and one that is being confirmed by HQ Marine Corps.

The EFV will be stripped of it complex drive system will be fitted with current but high tech jet pumps for its amphibious mission and will come online stripped down, and renamed the Amphibious Combat Vehicle.

The whole story is worth a read but this caught the eye...

Traditionally, an AOA of this type would take about 18 months, Flynn said June 9 at an event in Washington sponsored by the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

“We’re trying to get to six to nine months,” Flynn says, adding that he hoped the aggressive schedule would “energize the acquisition process” for the vehicle.

A speedy acquisition process isn't how things are usually done and points to a single sourced program.  Another tidbit that caught my attention is that the Congressional delegation has suddenly stopped it protests and holding up of the Defense budget.

All this points to General Dynamics winning the project through a sole sourced program probably to be announced either late this year or early next.

BAE fans shouldn't be too depressed though.  If I was a betting man then I'd lay every cent in my pocket that they'll win the upgrade contract...which leads to the wildcard in this whole thing.  If BAE is able to design an attractive enough upgrade package then it could essentially make the expense of a new EFV/ACV moot.  The AAV could theoretically continue in service --- just with new built vehicles.

AAV going into the surf at Red Beach.