Turkey’s tank fleet is currently made up of American M-48s and M-60s, some of which have been modernized with Israeli cooperation into M-60 Sabra tanks, plus a large contingent of German Leopard 1s and Leopard 2s. That is hardy surprising. America and Germany are Turkey’s 2 most important geopolitical relationships, and this is reflected in Turkey’s choice of defense industry partners. The country’s industrial offset requirements ensure that these manufacturers have a long history of local partnerships to draw upon.

In recent years, however, a pair of new players have begun to make an impact on the Turkish defense scene. One was Israel, whose firms specialized in sub-systems, upgrades, and UAVs. The other is the Republic of [South] Korea, who has made inroads in the Turkish market with turboprop training aircraft, mobile howitzers… and now, main battle tanks.

The Altay Program

Turkey’s new tank is named after Gen. Fahrettin Altay, a cavalry commander in Turkey’s War of Independence. The tank will use a 120mm smoothbore gun, with the usual 7.62mm coaxial machine gun and a pintle-mounted 12.7mm machin gun up top. Compared to the ROK’s K2 Black Panther, the Altay is reportedly longer, with an added road wheel and a slightly modified turret. It may also carry heavier armor.

The 2008 System Development deal includes the production of 4 prototypes worth $70 million dollars, and technology transfer worth $330 million dollars.

Once development is complete, a second set of production contracts will be signed. The Turks’ official goal was to design, test, and build the first Altay tank in 6.5 years, which would place the event in early 2015. So far, 2015 remains the target date for production to begin.

Turkey reportedly plans to produce 200-250 of the tanks locally.

Industrial

Under this $400 million development deal, The Republic of Turkey will own all design and intellectual property rights to the final vehicle. Turkey’s Otokar will build the tanks in cooperation with various sub-contractors, including:

• South Korea’s Hyundai Rotem (XK2 Black Panther base design, expertise and parts as required, technical support system, C3I, help with modernization of Otokar’s factory in the northwestern province of Sakarya).
  
• Aselsan (fire control and C3I systems, other sub-systems)
  
• MTU Friedrichshafen (1,500 hp diesel engine. May be replaced by 1,800 hp Turkish engine if they can develop it)
  
• SSM’s STM group (C3I co-development with Aselsan)
  
• Turkish Mechanical and Chemical Industry Corporation, i.e. state-owned MKEK, (120mm/55 caliber main gun)
  
• Roketsan (Modular Armor Package)

Foreign companies are reportedly under consideration for key items beyond the engine, including armor and complex systems integration.

Contracts and Key Events

ROK governments have been building a formidable local defense industry as a matter of policy, and those efforts are beginning to win export sales around the globe. The Altay project is just the latest payoff.

Relations with Turkey have been especially warm, owing in part to the Turks’ heroic combat record in the Korean War. In recent years, that combination of warm relations and solid products has led to Turkish orders worth hundreds of millions of dollars for KT-1 turboprop training aircraft, and K-9/K-10 derived “Firtina” mobile howitzers. In July 2007, South Korea’s inroads became undeniable, as discussions began concerning a deal to develop Turkey’s next generation tanks. That was a major upset, but it had yet to coalesce into a deal. By the end of July 2008, however, the ink was dry on a deal that made Korea’s new XK2 the basis of Turkey’s co-produced Altay tank.

December 1/17: Contracts-Power Pack Five local firms have responded to the Turkish government’s procurement agency, the Undersecretariat for Defence Industries’ (SSM) request for proposals to develop an indigenous power pack for the Altay main battle tank (MBT). This is the second attempt at developing a national diesel engine, after an initial award granted to Tumosan was rescinded after the company was unable to secure another foreign partner after Austrian firm AVL List GmbH was restricted by its government to participate in the program. Other supplier governments were also reluctant to supply transfer-of-technology and, in some cases, also requiring export licenses on subcomponents available commercially-off-the-shelf. Tumosan are among the five entries into the new award alongside BMC Automotive, Istanbul Marine Shipbuilding Industry and Trade, Figes Physics and Geometry Computer Simulation Trade, and TUSAS Motor. The renewed power plant program will see the Turkish industry develop critical components, such as the hydrostatic steering unit, turbocharger, cooling package, alternator, and transmission pump, and will be free of external intellectual property and regulatory restrictions.

November 03/17: Ankara announced this week a new $1 billion competition to design, develop, and eventually produce an engine and transmission system, or power group, for Turkey’s indigenous Altay tank program. A previous contract awarded to local engine-maker Tumosan, in conjunction with Austrian firm AVL List GmbH, was cancelled as part of Austria’s arms embargo on Turkey. Now chasing the money is the British-based European division of US firm Caterpillar, who have expressed interest in the power pack for the Altay program.

November 1/17: Rheimetall’s CEO has blasted the ongoing diplomatic spat between the Germany government and Turkey which has damaged relations and put a freeze on planned defense projects. Relations have been strained since the failed coup of 2016 against Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and the subsequent crackdown of opponents. Berlin has also refused to extradite people Turkey claim were involved in the plot. Armin Papperger, the German manufacturer’s CEO, said several defense projects had subsequently been put on hold, including the production of ammunition for fighter jets in Turkey and upgrades to Turkey’s Leopard tanks, and were still awaiting decisions by the two governments. Rheinmetall’s potential involvement in Turkey’s Altay tank program could also be in doubt—the firm has formed a joint venture with Turkey’s BMC to bid for the first tranche contract which would see 100-200 Altay units built.

September 27/17: Turkish Defence Minister Nurettin Canikli has accused US and German defense suppliers of a “covered” [indirect] arms embargo on Turkey. Canikli said that the firms were either halting shipments of spare parts of weapons systems to Turkey, or deliberately delaying them, while a Turkish diplomat dealing with NATO matters confirmed that some Turkish requests for systems and subsystems have not been addressed by the US and Germany. However, the British-based European division of US company Caterpillar—engine-maker Perkins—is in talks with Ankara to produce and supply an engine for the Altay, Turkey’s indigenous Main Battle Tank. Austria’s AVL List GmbH had initially been contracted to supply the power pack (engine and transmission) for the Altay, but this deal was cancelled after Austria’s parliament unanimously adopted a non-binding motion that imposed an arms embargo against Turkey in November 2016.

September 08/17: Turkey’s timetable for its Altay main battle tank hopes to have a winner selected by mid-2018, with bids from BMC, Otokar and FNSS expected for this November. The initial phase of the indigenous Altay tank program aims to initially serial produce a batch of 250 units, with military officials hoping that the program would eventually reach 1,000 units. Earlier this year, Otokar’s Altay prototypes successfully completed qualification tests including mobility and endurance testing on rough terrain and climatic conditions, firing tests with various scenarios, and survivability testing. However in June, the government procurement agency SSM, citing an unsatisfactory offer from Otokar for the serial production of the tank, canceled the contract and decided to go for an open competition.

July 20/17: Three Turkish defense firms will be asked to submit proposals to Turkey’s Altay tank program, which could reach beyond $10 billion. BMC, Otokar and FNSS—all private companies—will bid to secure a contract for the serial production of an initial batch of 250 Altay tanks, with Turkey planning to produce a total of 1,000 units. Ankara’s decision to include three bidders in the program comes after Otokar produced and successfully completed qualification tests of an Altay prototype, including mobility and endurance testing on rough terrain and climatic conditions, firing tests with various scenarios, and survivability testing. However, last month, the Turkish procurement agency deemed Otokar’s serial production sole-source offer as too expensive, instead opening up the competition to include other bidders.

June 16/17: Turkey has decided to ditch its sole-source negotiations with manufacturer Otokar for the serial production of the Altay tank, instead favoring to start an open bid for the same contract. Four prototypes were built by Otokar for developmental tests— successfully completed earlier this year—and clauses within the developmental allowed the firm, without competition, to make an offer for the serial production contract. However, Turkish procurement officials familiar with the Altay program, said that Otokar’s best and final offer failed to qualify for a single-source serial production contract. New bids are expected to be solicited by the end of the year, with FNSS and BMC expected to join Otokar in the new competition.

April 13/17: Despite issues with gaining certain technology transfers for the Altay, Turkey could begin serial production of the main battle tank as early as this May, according to Defense Minister Fikri Isik. Pakistan and some Gulf nations are believed to be lined up as potential customers for the vehicle. Talk of potential delays to the Altay surfaced when local contractor Tümosan was unable to continue working on providing a domestic diesel engine for the tank, after Austria’s AVL List GmbH, which it had as a technical support partner, ceased working with the Turkish firm amid concerns that the Turkish government were sliding on human rights issues. It now looks like Ankara may instead turn to Ukraine for help, with the Altay possibly adopting the Kharkiv Morozov Machine Building Design Bureau’s (KMDB) 1,500 hp 6TD-3 diesel engine.

March 5/17: The Turkish government has cancelled an engine development contract for the Altay main battle tank (MBT) with Tümosan after the company’s failure to secure a new design and development partner to replace AVL List GmbH from Austria. Tümosan’s need to find a new partner came about in January after they were forced by Ankara to cancel the deal with AVL List GmbH due to Turkey’s concerns with emerging political and regulatory issues in Austria, namely the Austrian government’s insistence on issuing export licenses with conditions. Speaking on the announcement, Tümosan cited reluctance from supplier governments to transfer technology and intellectual property and Turkey’s post-coup political events as major challenges in their ability to secure a new partner.

March 1/16: The Turkish government has granted land to defense firm BMC to relocate and build a new plant. The 222-hectare site will see $430 million invested by the company into the expansion with the plant believed to be operational within two years. BMC is currently bidding for the serial production of the indigenous Altay battle tank, which has been developed by rival company Otokar. While the bidding process has yet to begin, the winners would see a contract to produce up to 1,000 Altays after an initial run of 250 for the Turkish Army.

January 21/16: Turkey’s Undersecretariat for Defense Industries (SSM) has announced that a number of parties have expressed interest in purchasing their indigenous new generation main battle tank, the Altay. Those that may look to make purchases are regional allies, including a number of Gulf countries and Pakistan. Saudi Arabia in particular has been expressing keen interest after officials from these countries were invited to observe firing tests of the tank. While still in development, and a manufacturer for serial production is yet to be announced, the interest seemingly generated may lead to some big business for Ankara in the coming years.

Nov 18/14: XK-2. South Korea’s WON 2+ trillion (about $1.84 billion) XK-2 tank project, which served as the basis for Altay, has experienced delays due to technical difficulties. Acceleration performance has been a particular issue, and the ROK plans to field it with a locally-made engine and transmission by 2017. So far, about 100 K-2 Black Panther tanks have been deployed in Korea. Sources: Yonhap, “S. Korea to put K-2 combat tank into full service by 2017”.

Feb 27/14: Engines. While talking to reporters about Airbus’ A400M contract, Undersecretary for Defense Murad Bayar mentions that:

“Turkey’s Altay tank’s engine must be made in the country. There are also proposals from two Turkish companies to produce the engine in Turkey.”

It’s a blow to initial engine provider MTU Friedrichshafen. Whether it ends up affecting the tank depends on whether Turkish firms produce an engine in time, with adequate performance, efficiency and reliability. Sources: Anatolia News Agency, “Airbus and Turkey Dispute Over A400M Military Aircraft”.

Nov 14/13: Industrial shift? SSM’s chief, Murad Bayar, tells Defense News that they’re looking at a different approach to Altay’s production contract. Koc-owned Otokar is very likely to remain the main manufacturer, but they’re reportedly considering a consortium/ cooperative approach composed of Turkish and even foreign firms. Politics is playing a strong role:

“Otokar is owned by Turkey’s biggest business conglomerate, Koc Holding, whose defense business may be a casualty of a row between Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and one of its top executives after a month of civil unrest that battered the Turkish government. In one incident during June demonstrations, protesters tried to escape police tear gas and pepper spray by taking refuge in a posh Istanbul hotel, Divan, owned by Koc. Hotel management admitted the protesters to its lobby, but police fired more tear gas and pepper spray into the hotel lobby, although it is illegal to fire these chemicals into indoor spaces.”

The Erdogan government’s response was to relax the laws regarding police conduct, while calling the youthful protesters “terrorists” and promising to punish firms that helped them in any way. Koc has already lost a contract to build “Milgem” corvettes, so suspicions of a political motive over Altay are well founded. Defense News, “Turkey Mulling ‘Big Team’ for Tank Production” | Hurriyet Daily News, “Koc’s defense business a casualty of feud with government?” | Wikipedia, 2013 Protests in Turkey.

June 11/12: Update. While announcing its vehicle lineup for Eurosatory 2012, Otokar provides a project update:

“The first phase of the project, ‘Conceptual Design Process’, has been completed in 2010. And we presented the full-scale model, which reflects the concept design of ALTAY, at IDEF Exhibition, last year. In scope of the ‘Detailed Design Process’ which is the second and the most critical phase of the project, ‘Preliminary Design Phase’, has been successfully completed by the last quarter of 2011. During this phase, manufacturing of prototypes took start in line with this process. Following the completion of the Second Phase, we’re planning to start the ‘Prototype Development and Qualification Phase’ which is the third and the last phase. In scope of the project plan we continue investing in the first prototype of the ALTAY tank which will be ready for testing by the last quarter of this year. In addition to our existing facilities within Otokar plant, we have recently established a new Tank Test Center with an investment of USD 10 million.”

March 27/12: SSM’s plan. Turkey’s SSM procurement agency has unveiled their new 5-year strategic plan, with timetables for key acquisitions. The plan commits to begin deliveries of the Altay tank by 2015. Hurriyet Daily News

July 6/09: US Pressure on Israel. The Jerusalem Post reports that the USA had pressured Israel out of Turkey’s tank competition, in order to give American firms better odds. Israel would have entered the competition with a strong position to build on. Turkey’s existing M-60 tanks were heavily modernized by Israeli firms, based on the same “Sabra” modification set that Israel used on its own M60s. Beyond Sabra, Israel’s current Merkava family tanks are purpose-built for the needs of warfare in the Middle East, with unique features for urban warfare and counter-terrorism conflicts.

Within a couple of years, worsening relations between Turkey’s Islamist government and Israel made any such project unthinkable anyway.

March 2007: According to a resolution adopted at the meeting of the National Defence Executive Committee, the Turkish government decides to begin contract negotiations with Otokar, as the nominee for prime contractor.

February 2007: Bid evaluation process, aiming to appoint the prime contractor, is completed in February 2007.

April 2005: Feasibility study complete. The path forward is defined as “designing and development of the main battle tank inside Turkey by getting technical support and assistance from abroad whenever required.”

2005: The Turkish SSM defense procurement agency charges a 3-firm Turkish industrial consortium with a feasibility study to determine the production pattern for the Turkish National Main Battle Tank Project.

Additional Readings

• Turkish SSM procurement agency – Turkish National Main Battle Tank Project
• Army Technology – Altay Main Battle Tank, Turkey
• Wikipedia – K2 Black Panther
• Otokar corporate site
• Yonhap news service (May 27/08) – Seoul, Istanbul seal agreement on logistics cooperation. Military logistics, involving security of ammunition supply and other commodities in peace or war. This is an important agreement, and its signature makes the ROK’s status as a major Turkish arms supplier official.

The Lebanese Army’s own web site is blunt: “The assistance received from Syria, the USA, and other friendly countries has played a basic role in bridging the gap between needs and available means.”

A number of countries are stepping up to fill those gaps, left in a military ravaged by foreign occupation, a long and losing civil war, and the presence of Hizb’Allah – a foreign-backed private army in Lebanon, with superior firepower. The battle for influence in that country is multi-polar, with countries including the USA, France, and Saudi Arabia moving to counter Syria and Iran’s proxies, and countries like Russia working with independent agendas. The USA has been supplying a wide range of equipment from ammunition to armored vehicles, and is adding tanks, mini-UAVs, and even patrol boats to that list. Belgium has worked to sell some of its own tanks and APCs, France has offered help with Lebanon’s existing French equipment; and in April 2009, Russia went so far as to offer MiG-29 fighters, for free, from its own stocks.

What capabilities would these systems bring? How are those sales going? And how is Lebanon itself changing, in the wake of both Hezbollah’s takeover and Syria’s civil war?

UAVS, Tanks, and Planes

The main internal threat is Hezbollah, who is currently part of a 2009 unity government that is within the orbit of Syria’s Bashar Assad, and of Iran via its Hezbollah foreign legion. Pentration of the army and its institutions is accordingly extensive, which creates hard questions about the aid’s appropriateness, and security risks surrounding systems that are turned over.

Aerovironment’s RQ-11 Raven has become extremely popular in Afghanistan, and seen extensive use in Iraq. While the hand-launched UAV is far too small to carry anything beyond cameras, and is limited to low-flying missions out to about 1-15 miles, its virtues as a readily-used, squad-portable reconnaissance system that lets troops see over the next hill, or into the next block, are well and widely appreciated.

The M60 tank is a development of the M48 Patton, and was the M1 Abrams’ predecessor in the US Army and Marines. While the M1 was developed in response to the threat of the Soviet T-72, it turned out that the M60 was the T-72’s real peer competitor, whereas the M1 proved to be a massive overmatch. Something the M1 crews appreciated during combat in Operation Desert Storm. The M60A3 was the last serving model, sporting electronic upgrades while retaining the rounded turret and 105mm gun. It still serves with a number of militaries around the world. Egypt has the largest regional M60 fleet, followed by Turkey’s “M60 Sabras” that sport significant Israeli improvements to their sighting systems and electronics, as well as a full array of explosive reactive armor.

Recent combat experience teaches that even in urban situations, when tanks enter the fray, fights usually end quickly. Tanks of the M60’s vintage, however, lack the advanced armor protection and shaped designs required to withstand hits from popular threats like RPGs and anti-tank missiles. This can be remedied to some extent by adding explosive reactive armor and other ancillary systems. In their absence, however, M60s could not be expected to last very long against even private armies like Hezbollah, which makes extensive use of anti-tank missiles. The M60A3s, and similar vintage Leopard 1A5s from Belgium, would nonetheless offer an improvement over Lebanon’s existing T-54/55 and M48A5 tanks.

Lebanon’s fixed-wing fighter/attack force currently consists of about 4 Hawker Hunter jets, a 1950s era subsonic design that remains an aviation classic, and an OV-10 Bronco turboprop observation and light attack plane. In contrast, the used MiG-29s offered for free by Russia are late 1980s high-performance fighters, intended as a competitor to the F-16. Early versions are mainly air interceptor aircraft, though some Soviet MiG-29As were also given nuclear strike roles. Subsequent MiG-29Cs were confined to Soviet forces, incorporating radar improvements and an enlarged spine with extra fuel and an active electronic jammer system. Neither variant is suitable for delivering precision ground attack ordnance, a capability restricted to subsequent MiG-29S upgrades and modifications.

An interesting but very logical shift occurred in early 2010, when Russia and Lebanon agreed to substitute Mi-24 “Hind” helicopter gunships for the MiG-29s. The Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s saw some air-air engagements involving Iraqi Mi-24s and Iranian AH-1J SeaCobra helicopters, but the Hind’s main use is as a ground attack platform. It fits Lebanon’s military requirements and base infrastructure far better than the MiG-29s would have, but it also introduces an interesting new capability into Lebanon’s correlation of forces.

Meanwhile, Hezbollah’s participation in Lebanon’s government is a triple-edged sword for the Lebanese military.

On the one hand, it makes hostilities with Lebanon’s army unlikely so long as the accord lasts. The other 2 edges, however, are sharp. One is that it gave Hezbollah free rein to re-arm and organize. Hezbollah’s agenda is set in Iran and not in Lebanon, which has set the stage for future conflicts within and beyond Lebanon. For instance, Hezbollah is currently functioning as Iran’s Condor Legion equivalent in Syria’s civil war.

The other edge is that Israeli officials have said that since Hezbollah is part of the Lebanese government, acts carried out by Hezbollah would be considered to be coming from Lebanon’s government – i.e. acts of war rather than terrorism. The strong implication is that any Israeli response would encompass all of Lebanon, not just Hezbollah. So far, that has largely kept a lid on things.

Contracts and Key Events

December 18/17: BPC program The Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) continues to receive US military support, with US Gen. Joseph Votel announcing new arms packages for Beirut under the Pentagon’s “Building Partner Capacity” program. Three procurements are being financed through the BPC scheme, totalling $120 million, and aim to build the LAF’s capability to conduct border security and counterterrorism operations. The first program will see six new MD 530G light attack helicopters and associated equipment and training, valued at more $94 million. The second program, costing $11 million, will boost C4ISR capabilities with six ScanEagle UAVs, while the third will provide the LAF additional capabilities to employ joint fire support and close air support through the delivery of communications equipment, electronics equipment, night vision devices, and training, valued at more than $16 million.

December 19/16: Lebanese pilots and maintenance crew of the A-29 Super Tucano will travel to the US to receive training from the 81st Fighter Squadron at Moody Air Force Base, commencing February 2017. Six new aircraft alongside 80 personnel will travel from Lebanon; of which Twenty-two are maintainers with twelve pilots, while the rest are civilians and contractors required to support the training program. The 81st Fighter Squadron has already provided such training to A-29 operators from the Afghan Air Force.

August 12/16: $50 million in weapons has been delivered by the US to Lebanon. Goodies in the shipment include 50 armored Humvees, 40 Howitzer field artillery pieces, 50 MK-19 grenade launchers and 1,000 tons of ammunition, including small, medium and heavy artillery rounds. With Lebanon being the fifth-largest recipient of US military financing, the country has received more than $221 million in funding this year.

July 14/16: Production has commenced on Embraer A-29 Super Tucanos destined for Lebanon from the start of 2017. The US government agreed to a $173 million foreign military sales contract in November that will see Embraer’s US partner Sierra Nevada deliver six of the light-attack turboprops to the Lebanese air force by 2019. Once in service, the aircraft will support Lebanon’s fleet of intelligence and reconnaissance Cessna 208B Caravans.

March 17/16: Bell Helicopters are to supply three UH-1H Huey II helicopters to the government of Lebanon. The $18.9 million contract is expected to be completed by March 2017, and is part of an order for 18 Huey II helicopters for Lebanon approved by the US Department of State in September 2014. While initially designed as a troop transport and support helicopter, it has been pressed into service by Lebanon as a bomber. For this role they were fitted with extended undercarriage skids and improvised bomb racks for the delivery of 250 kg (550 lb) and 400 kg (880 lb) bombs.

February 22/16: A $3 billion Saudi Arabian aid package to allow the Lebanese Army to buy French weapons has been suspended. Saudi officials cited the lack of condemnation by Beirut over attacks on Saudi diplomatic missions in Iran for the cancelling the deal. The remainder of a further $1 billion package to help the Lebanese internal security service battle terrorism was also cancelled. The incident comes as one of a series highlighting the growing tensions between Sunni Saudi Arabia and Shi’a Iran, with Lebanese Hezbollah a key ally of Tehran. Equipment to be procured included combat and transport vehicles, attack helicopters, three small corvette warships, surveillance and communication equipment as well as the provision of training maintenance.

July 24/15: The Lebanese government has requested 1,500 TOW-2A guided missiles from the US, with the State Department approving the possible Foreign Military Sale, estimated to value $245 million. 1,000 of the missiles requested are the anti-armor variant and the remaining 500 bunker busting variants, with the order also including fifty launchers. The Lebanese government has recently received the first weapons purchased from France in November last year with Saudi financing the deal worth around $3 billion. Shipments of these weapons (including Milan anti-tank missiles) began in April. The country’s government also received weapons from China earlier this month, with these thought to have been donated by the Chinese government. The US has sent approximately $1 billion in military aid to Lebanon over the last eight years, previously supplying older versions of the TOW-2 system.

June 11/15: Lebanon is buying six Super Tucano ground attack aircraft from the US through a Foreign Military Sale thought to be worth approximately $462 million, including spares, support services and auxiliary equipment. The US and Lebanese governments discussed the potential sale of Super Tucanos in 2010, with the DSCA announcement on Tuesday confirming reports from March which set a deadline of 2018 for delivery of the six aircraft. The Embraer-manufactured turboprop aircraft is particularly useful in counterinsurgency operations, as well as being more very affordable. For these reasons the Super Tucano has seen export success to several African states and numerous other nations worldwide.

Feb 26/15: April set as French arms delivery commencement. France is reportedly to start shipping its planned sale of $3 billion worth of Saudi-purchased arms to Lebanon in April. The announcement appears to have taken many media organs by surprise, given the already volatile military situation in the country. Different reports ascribe various Saudi motives for the pressing of the weapons into Lebanese Army hands, ranging from expressing pique at the U.S. (UPI) – whose arms were not purchased – to a direct effort to fund a force to take on Hezbollah (MintPress). It took the French two years to get to this point of readiness. Had the Saudis sought U.S. arms, the approvals would certainly have been much longer in coming, if they ever came. That the Lebanese Army would take on Hezbollah remains unlikely, as precedent shows a long inability to deny Hezbollah anything in Lebanon the group wishes to take.

Oct 24/14: UK. After a meeting between UK Chief of the Defense Staff General Sir Nicholas Houghton and Lebanese Army Commander General Jean Kahwaji. the UK sends Lebanon a $16 million donation. It includes 164 Land Rovers, 1,500 sets of body armor, a secure radio communication network, border watchtowers, and HESCO bastions that can be filled with earth to create bulletproof walls in Army positions along the frontier. Meanwhile, Lebanon’s Daily Star says:

“As for the earlier $3 billion aid announced by Saudi King Abdullah Bin Abdel-Aziz, it will come in the form of weapons, equipment and training to be provided by France…. [but] has not yet gone into effect with reports saying that the Kingdom first wants to receive assurances that the weapons will not benefit Hezbollah.”

That sounds like a pretty tall order, given the realities of Lebanon. Sources: Al Defaiya, “UK Delivers Military Equipment to Lebanese Army”.

Oct 8/14: France. The French defense minister says that the 3-way deal with Saudi Arabia (q.v. Dec 30/13) may finally be ready to finance over EUR 2 billion in purchases of French weapons:

“Ce projet a ete valide par la France et ce projet est valide avec les forces armees libanaises”, a-t-il declare mercredi 8 octobre, lors de la seance des questions au gouvernement. Et d’ajouter : “Tous les travaux sont termines et le president de la Republique a indique hier à Monsieur [Saad] Hariri [ancien Premier ministre et leader politique de la communaute sunnite libanaise, NDLR] que les conditions etaient desormais remplies.”

That could end up being a very substantial infusion. The question is what the government will spend it on. And who will end up controlling what they buy. Sources: France24, “Liban : conditions réunies pour livrer des armes françaises, selon Le Drian”.

Sept 12/14: AC-208Bs. US ambassador David Hale says the USA will send “an armed Cessna” , and also arm a Cessna it had previously provided to the Lebanese Army. they’re referring to the AC-208B conversion, which allows the Caravan to independently carry, target, and fire 2 AGM-114 Hellfire laser-guided missiles. It’s hardly a regional power projection tool, but it’s a fine platform for surveillance and strikes on isolated guerrilla groups.

“The Lebanese government and army have requested additional aircraft from the United States: an armed Cessna and other light air support aircraft… It is our intention to support those requests for additional aircraft, using funds generously made available to Lebanon by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia…” [q.v. Dec 30/13]

That won’t use much of their $3 billion offer, and it’s a good investment for all concerned. Beyond the usual hijinks in Lebanon, the Sunni ISIS group has reached beyond Syria and Iraq into Lebanon, taking a number of Lebanese soldiers captive and beheading them. Iraq is already using AC-208Bs successfully against ISIS, and the USA is stepping up efforts to contain the group via 3rd parties since it has abandoned its own combat presence in Iraq. The Saudis also see ISIS as a threat, one that’s approaching the level offered by Iran and its legions. Sources: Lebanon Daily Star, “US arming Lebanon military to combat ISIS: Hale” | Kuwait News Agency, “US to deliver armed light Cessna aircraft to Lebanon to combat ISIL” | Middle East Monitor, “US to deliver armed aircraft to Lebanon”.

Dec 30/13: Saudi Arabia. Lebanon couldn’t help but be drawn into the Sunni-Shia proxy wars that are engulfing the Arab world. Saudi Arabia pledges $3 billion in military aid to Lebanon’s government, in a move that’s clearly designed to strengthen that government at the expense of Iran’s Hezbollah. Specific equipment isn’t specified, so we’ll see how all of this works itself out.

Here’s the Saudi dilemma, in a nutshell: what to provide? If the money is used to provide small arms, anti-tank missiles, and good training, it would probably make the biggest difference on the ground. The bad news? These items are small and portable. Hezbollah’s infiltration of the armed forces and power within the government means that many of the items in question won’t stay in government hands. On the other hand, if Saudi aid is used to provide higher-end items like armed helicopters, armored vehicles, etc., then the bad news is that $3 billion doesn’t actually deliver as much as one imagines. Especially in a military whose support systems and infrastructure are questionable. That high-end approach is also vulnerable to counter-strokes: all Hezbollah would need to do, in order to incapacitate new fleets, would be to threaten the maintenance workers in order to ensure that they do a poor job. Sources: CS Monitor, “Saudi Arabia promises record $3 billion in military aid to Lebanon”.

July 31/13: Radios. Advanced Technology Systems Co. in McLean, VA receives a $26.7 million multi-year, firm-fixed-price, foreign military sales from Lebanon for TETRA trunked radio communication systems. TETRA is an abbreviation of TErrestrial Trunked RAdio. It has been defined and approved by the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI), and is a standard for radio communication in the same way that GSM is a mobile telephony standard. It’s often used to create networks for first responders and internal security forces, but a number of militaries around the world also use them.

Work will be performed in Lebanon. One bid was solicited, with one bid received by US Army Contracting Command in Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD (W15P7T-13-C-D082).

May 26/13: Syria/Lebanon War. In the New Yorker, war correspondent Dexter Filkins reports:

“It’s official: the war in Syria has spread to Lebanon. In an extraordinary speech Saturday, Hassan Nasrallah, the bearded and bespectacled leader of the Lebanese militant group, Hezbollah, promised an all-out effort to keep the murderous regime of Bashar al-Assad in power in Syria. “It’s our battle, and we are up to it,” Nasrallah said in a televised address. The war, he said, had entered “a completely new phase.”

This is a terrifying development; the beginning of a regional war. Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed armed group, has been fighting inside Syria for months, something I detailed in an article on the group in February. But Hezbollah was intervening in Syria covertly…. As more and more Hezbollah fighters died inside Syria, that lie could no longer be sustained. The truth is out.

On Saturday, by declaring his undying loyalty to the Assad regime, Nasrallah has signalled an escalation in Hezbollah’s involvement…”

Nov 1/12: Hueys. Bell Helicopter Textron Inc. in Hurst, TX receives a $33.4 million firm-fixed-price contract for single-engine UH-1H+ Huey II helicopters and related support services. Work will be performed in Hurst, TX with an estimated completion date of Dec 31/13. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received by U.S. Army Contracting Command at Redstone Arsenal, AL (W58RGZ-11-G-0011).

U.S. Army Security Assistance Command has confirmed to us that this order will be transferred to the “government” of Lebanon. The July 25/12 DSCA request was for 6, and this appears to cover that number.

July 25/12: Helicopter request. The US DSCA announces [PDF] a potential sale to Lebanon of 6 Huey II helicopters and associated equipment, parts, training, and logistical support, at an estimated cost of $63 million. Hezbollah is still in charge, albeit somewhat weakened by the civil war in Syria, which interferes with supply lines to their masters in Iran. The US DSCA claims that:

“This proposed sale serves U.S. national, economic, and security interests by providing Lebanon with necessary mobility capabilities to maintain internal security, enforce United Nation’s Security Council Resolutions 1559 and 1701, and counter terrorist threats… The Huey II will augment Lebanon’s aging fleet of UH-1H aircraft.”

If Congress agrees enough to avoid overtly blocking the sale within 30 days, Lebanon can begin negotiations with Bell Helicopter in Fort Worth, TX. Fortunately for Bell, “Implementation of this proposed sale will not require the assignment of any additional U.S. Government or contractor representatives to Lebanon.”

Jan 12/12: AC-208Bs. Alliant Techsystems, Inc. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $16.1 million firm-fixed-price contract for one used Caravan Cessna 208B aircraft, continued contractor logistics support, and spares with associated repair and return effort. This supports a Foreign Military Sales Program and the Lebanon Air Force Caravan Program.

The C-208B is a single-propeller plane that’s often used for flight training and light cargo duties. The Iraqi Air Force have turned them into low-cost AC-208B “Combat Caravan” surveillance and close support planes by adding a surveillance/targeting turret, accompanying internal displays, and M299 racks for Hellfire missiles on the wings. official reports indicate that the planes headed to Lebanon are Combat Caravans.

Work will be performed in El Segundo, CA, and is expected to be complete by Nov 16/16. The ASC/WINK/FMS at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH acts as Lebanon’s agent in this matter (FA8620-12-C-4005). See also Flight International.

June 13/11: Takeover. The new Lebanese government names its cabinet, which Hezbollah and its supporters dominate. BBC.

Jan 19/11: Takeover. Hezbollah ousts Prime Minister Hariri and engineers a de facto coup in Lebanon. Lebanon Daily Star | Now Lebanon | Reuters | Ya Libnan.

Jan 14/11: Patrol Boats. Maritime Security Strategies, LLC in Tampa, FL received a $29 million firm-fixed price contract to construct a 42-meter coastal security craft and provide associated equipment, material, training and technical services to the Government of Lebanon. This will be the first sale of the firm’s AMP-145 multi-mission platform design, though their regional orders also include 2 60-meter Offshore Supply/Command Vessels under construction for the Iraqi Navy.

MSS’ managing partner, USN Rear Admiral (ret.) Robert Cox touts “new designs and features that deliver significant cost and performance improvements over the current industry offerings,” including fast reconfiguration. The hulls are an epoxy-resin composite, with an aluminum deck and superstructure. American shipbuilders have had mixed results with composite hulls, but they are coming into wider international use due to their weight advantages, which translates directly into greater speed, increased maneuverability and lower fuel consumption.

The Lebanese Navy’s AMP-145 incorporates ITAR compliant controls and automation, including embedded sensors in key components, and a non-militarized, passive Integrated Bridge System (IBS) from Raytheon Anschutz GmbH that manages the ship’s automation system, as well as feeds from CCTV and a FLIR thermal imaging cameras. Surface search X and S-band ARPA radars, a full package of navigation sensors, data management software, GMDSS A3, and all other electronics and safety equipment completes the IBS and Command and Surveillance package. The C2/Operations Center is fitted with a customized Situational Awareness Display which shares all charts, targets and craft movements with the Integrated Bridge System. Depictions of the craft show a 30mm cannon and mounts for 7.62mm – 12.7mm machine guns, but armament details were not provided.

Work will be performed in Tampa, FL, and is expected to be complete by January 2012, though the company has set a delivery date of end 2011. MSS will work with its primary design agent and shipbuilding partner, RiverHawk Fast Sea Frames, LLC, of Tampa, FL to design, produce and outfit the ship. The MSS/RiverHawk team is currently completing epoxy-resin composite hull construction and rigging in of the major engineering systems at VectorWorks Marine facilities in Titusville, FL. The aluminum decks and superstructure are nearing completion in RiverHawk’s Tampa yard, where they will be mated to the hull, and several South Florida sub-contractors will also play significant roles. The contract was not competitively procured by US Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC, who manages the contract on behalf of its Foreign Military Sale client (N00024-11-C-2241).

• Length: 43.5 meters
  
• Breadth overall: 8.5 meters
  
• Draft: ~ 2 meters
  
• Displacement: ~ 265 metric tons
  
• Crew Complement: 6 – 22
  
• Speed: > 25 knots
  
• Range @ 11 Knots: > 2600 nm
  
• Effective Limits @ 12 Knots: Sea State 4
  
• Survivability: Sea State 5
  
• Endurance: 5-7 days

Meanwhile, Hezbollah has taken its marching orders and withdrawn from the government in Lebanon, setting up a minor political crisis as the country waits for a UN report that’s likely to indict Hezbollah members, as well as its foreign backers in Syria and beyond, for the Hariri assassination. See also: Maritime Security Strategies | Al-Defaiya | Al-Jazeera | Reuters | Voice of America | Israel’s Ynet News.

Dec 17/10: HOT missiles. Agence France Presse reports that France will give Lebanon 100 MBDA HOT anti-tank missiles to equip Lebanon’s SA342M Gazelle helicopters. A Lebanese official told AFP that: “The missiles will be delivered before the end of February and are being given with no conditions attached.”

The move has sparked concern among some American political figures. Lebanese received 12 Gazelle helicopters in mid-2007, and in January 2010, it signed an agreement to refurbish them (vid. Jan 22/10 entry).

Nov 13/10: Unblocked. The congressional hold on $100 million in military aid to Lebanon clears, as Rep. Howard Berman [D-CA] and Nita Lowey [D-NY] drop their opposition after a classified briefing and presenting results of a “thorough inter-agency review” by the Obama administration. Berman: “As a result, I am convinced that implementation of the spending plan will now have greater focus, and I am reassured as to the nature and purposes of the proposed package.” Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS) Resident Scholar Aram Nerguizian, whose report on U.S. military aid to Lebanon is coming out later in November 2010, has said that American aid can help the armed forces keep a lid on Lebanon, and “keeps Lebanon from escalating beyond the range of the real.” Israel, on the other hand, seemed less reassured:

“Iran’s domination of Lebanon through its proxy Hezbollah has destroyed any chance for peace, has turned Lebanon into an Iranian satellite and made Lebanon a hub for regional terror and instability”

Lifting the hold Congressional may release funds while the present “lame duck” session is still alive, until and unless future action affirmatively blocks it. Berman chairs the House Foreign Affairs committee, and Lowey heads the House Appropriations committee’s foreign operations subcommittee. They will be reduced to ranking minority members in the new Congress, however, and Berman’s likely successor, Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen [R-FL], opposes further aid to Lebanon as well as to the Palestinian Authority. Lebanese Daily Star | Agence France Presse | Israel’s Arutz Sheva | Bloomberg | Foreign Policy Magazine | Jerusalem Post | Fox News | UAE’s The National | Reuters | Voice of America.

Aug 8/10: Blocked. The US Congress is blocking $100 million in aid to the Lebanese military, amidst concerns it is cooperating with Hezbollah. The Congressional holds come in the wake of an Aug 3 shooting of 2 Israeli officers while brush was being cleared along the northern border. One Israeli officer was killed and another seriously wounded in the firefight, which also killed at least 2 Lebanese soldiers and a journalist. There are reports that the Lebanese troops in question were using American-supplied weapons. Associated Press | Jerusalem Post | al-Manar TV (Hezbollah affiliate) | Lebanon Daily Star | Australia’s The Age/ Reuters re: clash.

June 3/10: The USA delivers $427,000 worth of weapons, body armor and bomb investigation equipment to Lebanese security officials, via a $1 million anti-terrorism assistance program for Lebanon from the U.S. State Department. UPI.

May 24/10: Rising US concern. Foreign Policy magazine’s blog The Cable documents rising concern within the Pentagon and Congress over continued military aid to Lebanon, in the wake of what they see as a blurring of the lines between the government and Hezbollah.

Feb 26/10: Make Hinds, not Fulcrums. NaharNet reports that Lebanese President Michel Suleiman has returned from a visit to Russia, and…

“Russian authorities agreed to substitute the 10 MiG-29 fighter jets previously mulled military aid with Mi-24 advanced military helicopters “based on the request of the Lebanese side that conducted technical and functional studies on the Russian fund for the Lebanese Air Force.”

The Mi-24 “Hind” helicopter gunship became famous during Russia’s war in Afghanistan, and it remains popular with militaries around the world. The most modern version is the Mi-35. Unlike most attack helicopters, it has secondary troop transport capabilities.

Jan 22/10: Lebanon has reportedly signed an agreement with the French company Euro Tech to revamp 13 Gazelle helicopters transferred in 2007, equipping the 10 Puma helicopters granted by the UAE, and training Lebanese helicopter pilots.

The Puma helicopters are expected to start arriving within the first half of 2010 in 2 batches of 4 and then 6 machines. Reports suggest, however, that France is hesitant to supply Lebanon with missiles for the Gazelle helicopters, for fear they would end up in Hezbollah’s hands. The Lebanese Air Force reportedly used up all of its missiles in the 2007 Nahr el-Bared battle against Fatah al-Islam terrorists. Nahar Net.

Nov 16/09: Media report that Russian military experts will be visiting Lebanon in the next few days and staying until Nov 26/09. They will be assessing the conditions at Lebanese airports and bases, assessing their ability to support MiG-29s and other equipment. A formal contract for the 10 MiG-29s is expected very shortly after their report. China’s Xinhua reports that the MiG deal is causing some trepidation in certain parts of Lebanon:

“Since then, the deal has sparked an internal debate about the necessity of obtaining these aircraft in a small country like Lebanon, which has a national army and an armed militia Hezbollah, which owns thousands of short and mid-range rockets.”

See also: Lebanese Daily Star | Naharnet Newsdesk | Il-Oubnan | China’s Xinhua.

April 9/09: Naharnet Newsdesk reports confirmation of American arms shipments to Lebanon by US State Department officials David Hale and Colin Kahl:

“Hale said the shipment includes 41 Howitzer artillery and 12 Zodiac boats. He said the Lebanese military will also be receiving in May 12 pilotless Raven aircrafts that would help the army monitor any attempt to fire rockets from southern Lebanon into northern Israel. Hale said the delivery also includes one Cessna Caravan aircraft, which is expected to arrive end of April to provide air support for ground forces. A set of 20 Hellfire air-to-ground missiles and the first batch of 10 M-60 tanks will also be arriving in May, according to Hale.”

April 8/09: The Pentagon’s AFPS reports on progress:

“Toward helping it fulfill that role, the United States has provided more than $410 million in military assistance to Lebanon since 2006. That support has included Humvees, trucks, M-198 howitzer artillery pieces, M-4 and M-16 rifles, body armor vests, MK-19 grenade launchers, shoulder-fired rockets, spare helicopter parts and millions of ammunition rounds.

More recently, the Defense Department has been working with the Lebanese government to expedite delivery of Cessna close-air-support aircraft with precision Hellfire missiles and [RQ-11] Raven unmanned aerial vehicle systems. The United States is also working to transfer M60 Abrams tanks to the Lebanese military from other countries in the region, Kahl said. These systems, expected to be delivered by June…”

Dec 19/08: Defense News quotes “a senior U.S. state department official… in Beirut” saying that he U.S. plans to deliver M-60 tanks to Lebanon in spring 2009. the official stresses that the US does not see any competition with Russia or other countries, as all assistance to help the Lebanese government is welcome.

Dec 1/08: The Pentagon’s AFPS publishes “U.S. Forces Help Lebanese Military Assert Control“, which discusses American efforts to re-equip Lebanon’s army:

“The United States and Lebanon signed a military cooperation agreement in October [2008], establishing the U.S.-Lebanese Joint Military Commission to provide an official framework for the bilateral U.S.-Lebanese military relationship… “The most important [recommendation] was that the Lebanese military needed a lot of help in the military basics… They needed trucks, Humvees, parts and ammunition more than they needed high-end, expensive weaponry.” They also need training… In 2006, the United States renewed its security relationship with Lebanon, and since then has funneled more than $400 million in foreign military sales money… “Our part of that is to help build up the Lebanese armed forces so the Lebanese government can be sovereign in all its territory.”

…The United States has sent 285 Humvees to Lebanon, and another 312 will arrive by March. The United States has sent 200 trucks to the Lebanese and 41 M-198 155 mm artillery pieces. The Lebanese army also will get night-vision equipment and some tactical unmanned aerial vehicles. “Behind it is all basics – 12 million rounds of ammo, spare helicopter parts, shoulder-fired rockets,” Straub said. “We want them to play their role in controlling Lebanese territory. We also want them to deter the terrorist threat.” The United States is committed to getting Lebanon more modern tanks, and the U.S. military is working on delivering M-60A3 tanks.”

Dec 18/08: The UK’s Times reports that Russia will provide Lebanon with 10 MiG-29 fighter jets, for free, under an agreement on military-technical assistance. Rosoboronexport’s Mikhail Dmitryev said that the jets would come from Russia’s existing stock, and added that Moscow was also in talks to supply Lebanon with heavy armor. The country currently operates very old T-54/55 Russian tanks.

Aug 27/08: Belgian defense minister Pierre Crem visits Lebanon to finalize an agreement to sell 43 Leopard 1A5 tanks, and 28 M113 derivative armored personnel carriers (16 AIFVs and 12 conventional), to Lebanon. RTL Info via MplL.

M113s form the backbone of Lebanese mechanized forces, thanks to significant donations from American stocks. The AIFV model adds a 25mm gun. The Leopard 1A5 is a modernized Leopard tank, roughly on par with or slightly better than the American M60A3.

Additional Readings

• Lebanese Army – Equipment
• Wikipedia – Lebanese Ground Forces Equipment
• Commentary Magazine (April 14/09) – The UN’s Disintegration in Lebanon Michael Totten has spent time living in Lebanon over the past few years, and often reports on that country for various publications.

Wheeled armored vehicles have become much more common, but the Dutch-German Boxer stands out from the crowd. Its English acronym is “Multi Role Armoured Vehicle” (MRAV), but rather than being a family of different vehicles, the Boxer will use a single chassis, with snap-in modules for different purposes from infantry carrier to command, cargo, ambulance, etc.

The base vehicle has a maximum road speed of 100 km/h (60 mp/h) and an operational range of 1,000 km (600 miles). In its troop carrying configuration, it has a crew of 2 and can carry 10 fully equipped troops. The MRAV is fighting for space in a crowded market, but its principal countries are beginning to give it the front-line credibility it needs to succeed.

Boxer MRAV: The Vehicle

The base 8×8 vehicle provides a load capacity to 8 tonnes (9 tons) and has an internal capacity of more than 14 square meters. The Mission modules fit into the base vehicle’s steel shell, incorporating a primary safety cell with a triple floor and shaped sides to deflect mine blasts. Ceramic modular armor is sandwiched between the vehicle cell and the steel coat, and all three elements are secured by fastening bolts. The shaped sides of the modules also work to deflect mine blasts away from the soldiers inside, while a double-lined hull soaks up critical blast deformation.

The exact maximum weight of a Boxer MRAV depends on the version, and on its add-on armor package. The base is currently about 30 tonnes (33 tons), but its current design allows it to grow to 36 tonnes (39.6 tons) without any additional modification to the drive line. The vehicle and modules are air transportable in an A400M or larger aircraft, and modules are interchangeable in less than one hour.

Boxer MRAV: The Program

In mid-2006 the Netherlands decided to remain in the ARTEC consortium’s joint Boxer MRAV modular armored personnel carrier project with Germany. Despite earlier reservations, Dutch secretary of Defense Cees van der Knaap declared to the 2nd Chamber that the country wanted to continue with the project. By June 28th, 2006, a release noted that the Chamber had given the green light; the APC’s price has apparently been reduced to an acceptable level following negotiations with Stork. A formal contract worth up to EUR 1.2 billion (about $1.6 billion) was finally signed in December 2006, clearing the way for both Dutch & German vehicle production.

The Royal Netherlands Army is purchasing 200 Boxer vehicles for transport, engineering, command, and transportation of wounded, replacing some of their YP-408s and all of their M577s (command post version of the M113). The 200 Boxer MRAVs will be delivered in 5 versions – 58 ambulances, 55 Command Post variants, 41 engineer group (pioneer) vehicles, 27 cargo vehicles, and 19 cargo/command-and-control vehicles to replace the current YPR 765 tracked vehicles. Note that this figure is down from initial estimates of 384 vehicles.

In addition to the Boxers, the Dutch Army will also be operating BAE Hagglunds’ CV90-35 MkIIIs as Infantry Fighting Vehicles.

Under current plans, Jane’s revised reports indicate that the German Army is due to take delivery of 272 Boxer vehicles in 3 baseline versions: 135 armored personnel carriers (APCs), 65 command post (CP) variants, and 72 heavy armored ambulances. The Boxers will replace some Fuchs 6 x 6 and tracked M113-series APCs currently in service; like the Dutch Boxers, they will fill a middle weight armor role alongside heavier tracked Infantry Fighting Vehicles – in this case, the new KMW/Rheinmetall Puma.

The Boxer program is being managed by the European OCCAR (Organisation for Joint Armament Cooperation) Armaments Agency. Britain was initially part of the MRAV consortium as well, but left in 2003 to pursue its own future armored vehicles project called FRES. The industrial contractor is ARTEC GmbH – acting on behalf of the consortium formed by Kraus-Maffei Wegmann (36%), Rheinmetall Landsysteme (14%) and Stork PWV (50%).

Manufacturing of the vehicles will take place in both countries. Amsterdam-based Stork PWV is the national prime contractor and system integrator for the Dutch Boxer vehicles. As a partner, Stork Special Products is also responsible for assembling of the power pack consisting of a MTU engine, angular gear, transmission, cooling block and over 1,200 minor parts in total. They’re also developing the Environmental Control System, an air-conditioning system with integrated NBC(nuclear, biological, chemical) protection.

Contracts and Key Events

February 9/18: An offer the UK can’t refuse? German-Dutch consortium ARTEC has promised to produce and assemble the majority of its Boxer armored personnel carrier (APC) at Pearson Engineering’s factory in northeast England, if the UK Ministry of Defense finalizes orders for the supply of several hundred of the eight-wheel drive APCs to the British Army. Assembly, design, and manufacture in the UK would generate approximately 1,000 jobs and keep about 60 percent of the $2.7 billion contract within the UK—an attractive offer in a nation looking to keep and boost manufacturing employment after the decision to leave the European Union in 2016. The announcement was made by ARCTEC—a joint venture between Krauss-Maffei Wegmann and Rheinmetall?as part of a statement that it had recruited as part of its team, Pearson, BAE Systems and Thales UK, and comes as the MoD closes on a decision whether to buy the Boxer without a competition. However, as the Daily Telegraph reports, concerns about a funding hole in the defence budget means a decision contract has been pushed back, as well as being complicated by rival suppliers complaining they have been shut out of the program and that Artec’s proposals would not offer as much work to the UK supply chain as theirs.

July 7/17: Rheinmetall MAN Vehicles expects to receive a contract from ARTEC—the consortium behind the Boxer 8×8 vehicle—to modernize 38 of the armored vehicles for the German Army. ARTEC, a joint venture of Krauss-Maffei Wegmann GmbH, Rheinmetall MAN Military Vehicles GmbH and Rheinmetall MAN Military Vehicles Nederland, received the order from OCCAR, the European procurement agency in late June, in a deal that is in excess of $23.8 million. The deal will see the vehicles upgraded from the command variant to the A2 level, which requires changes to the vehicles’ chassis and mission modules. Other enhancements include advanced driver visualization technology, new weapon systems, IT equipment modules and new communication systems.

August 24/16: Lithuania’s Ministry of Defense continues with the modernization of their land forces after awarding a $435.1 million contract to the German-Dutch Artec consortium for the provision of 8×8 Boxer infantry fighting vehicles (IFVs). The group, a cooperation between Krauss-Maffei Wegmann and Rheinmetall MAN Military Vehicles will deliver the vehicles equipped with Israeli-made turrets and armed with 30 mm cannons and Spike LR anti-tank missiles. This follows a bilateral cooperation between Lithuania and the Dutch government, who are currently in the process of transferring second hand Army land vehicles east to boost Lithuanian military capabilities.

June 25/14: Dutch delivery. Formal delivery of the 1st Dutch Boxer to the 13th NL Brigade’s medical company. The Director of the NL Defence Materiel Organisation symbolically delivers the vehicle by handing over a wrench that serves as an emergency opener for the rear door. Sources: OCCAR, “Formal handover of first Netherlands BOXER vehicle to the customer”.

April 7/14: Update. OCCAR-EA’s BOXER Programme Manager has approved delivery of the first Dutch Boxer, an ambulance variant. The NL AMB BOXER vehicle is the first BOXER vehicle built at the new Rheinmetall MAN Military Vehicles – NL facilities in Ede, The Netherlands. The schedule foresees that the last of the 52 NL AMB will be delivered in January 2015, to be followed with the next NL BOXER vehicle types: Command Post (CP), Engineers Group (GNGP) and Cargo (CAR). The Dutch are getting 8 Driver Training Vehicles (DTV), and 192 Boxer variants for delivery by the end of 2017.

Germany has already received 225 vehicles, built by KMW in Munich and by Rheinmetall in Kassel, leaving just 47 left to be delivered to Germany before the end of 2016. Sources: OCCAR, “Start of The Netherlands’ Ambulance BOXER delivery”.

May 2012: LANCE. Rheinmetall announces that a concept study equipping the Boxer with Rheinmetall’s LANCE medium caliber turret has finished trials at their test center in Unterluss. The firm worked with RMMV Kassel, RLS Augsburg and RLS Kiel, to combine the LANCE turret system with a Boxer module, and modify the mission module.

Jan 24/12: The German Bundeswehr produces a video about the Boxer’s combat deployment in Afghanistan. Deployment is going well, but they may want more storage space. That’s always an interesting challenge with APCs. The Boxer CP variant is set to arrive in theater in February 2012. German Bundeswehr [in German] | Aviation Week.

July 22/11: German Boxer A1 MRAVs ship out to Afghanistan, aboard chartered AN-124 aircraft.

A1 is a modification set designed for ISAF operations in Afghanistan. It includes extra armor, raising the FLW-200 remote weapon station 30 cm/ 1 foot to give it better coverage high and low, and an appropriate camouflage pattern for the ISAF region. FuInfoSys networking between the Boxer and the infantry group equipped with the IdZ-21 Future Soldier system is standard. KMW.

March 3/11: Germany readies to deploy the Boxer. Its driver training school in Dornstadt received 7 Driver Training Vehicles (DTV) in 2010. In February 2011, another 8 Boxer APCs were delivered to 292 Jaegerbattalion in Donaueschingen, in preparation for the vehicle’s deployment to Afghanistan with this unit in August 2011. OCCAR | German Army [in German].

Oct 7/10: BAE Systems announces a $3.6 million contract from Krauss-Maffei Wegmann (KMW) to manufacture and deliver SCHROTH brand 4-point harness safety restraint with integrated airbag systems, to equip for 125 German Boxer vehicles. BAE will produce 7 restraint systems per vehicle (875 total), along with replacement parts. As part of the agreement, SCHROTH engineers have also developed a special, self-administered diagnostic tool for soldiers to verify that the systems are in working order. Deliveries of the new restraint system are expected to be completed in 2014.

Airbags to protect passengers are nothing new in civilian vehicles, but they’re still rare in combat vehicles. In the event of a crash, sensors on the SCHROTH harness measure the resulting acceleration, and send signals to gas generators whose micro pyrotechnical charges deploy the airbags in a fraction of a second.

April 27/10: A brief to the Dutch Parliament says that Boxer MRAV “Drive Module” (main body) qualification will not be done by the end of 2010, as scheduled. The vehicle did not fully meet contracted standards, and Germany’s intent to use Boxers in Afghanistan in 2010 has had effects of its own.

An agreement was reached with Germany for post-delivery qualifications in 2010, during so-called “Reliability Batch Trials,” with any changes Germany requires made at the manufacturer’s expense. Agreements were also made concerning post-qualification of some Drive Module sub-components, and alteration of the Logistic Qualification Course.

In contrast, the Dutch absolutely require pre-qualification before they’ll accept delivery. That means delays for series production of Dutch vehicles, and to the future Cargo, Ambulance and Command versions. Extra budget is also being requested to modify the Dutch C2-LAN system to a full C4I system. Kamenbrief [in Dutch]

Feb 8/10: KMW subsidiary Dutch Defense Vehicle Systems (DDVS) opens a new production facility in Helmond, near Eindhoven, NL. The facility will produce all hulls and several mission modules for the German-Dutch Boxer vehicle program, which currently stands at a total of 472 vehicles. Helmond will also be the site for logistics and maintenance service to the Dutch fleet of Fennek reconnaissance vehicles. KMW release [PDF]

Sept 23/09: At a ceremony in Munich, Rheinmetall Defence and Krauss-Maffei Wegmann (KMW) transfer the first serially produced Boxer to the Organisation Conjointe de Coopération en matière d’Armement (OCCAR), which is administering the Boxer project, and Germany’s Federal Agency for Defence Technology and Procurement (BWB). Rheinmetall | KMW [PDF format].

May 8/08: ARTEC’s Boxer MRAV made a dramatic comeback to reach the finals, but lost to General Dynamics MOWAG’s Piranha-V in Britain’s FRES-Utility competition. | UK MoD release | General Dynamics UK release.

June 14/07: Stung by criticism that the MoD has wasted years in order to select off-the-shelf vehicles that may not be survivable enough, Minister for Defence Equipment and Support Lord Drayson fires back in a public forum:

“Yes, the Boxer was a programme the MoD pulled out of when it was known as the MRAV programme. We took that decision in 2002 in light of the requirement at the time. We have since reviewed the FRES requirement in light of recent operational experience in Iraq and Afghanistan. Force protection in theatre now has a higher priority than strategic deployability – I don’t think anyone would argue with that view. When the situation changes our procurement process must be capable of responding to that change… I’m not going to go into the details of the protection FRES will have in a public forum… But to suggest that we are ignoring the threats we face in Iraq and Afghanistan today when we set the requirement for our future vehicles is wrong. And the idea that taking into account the full range of threats FRES will be less well protected than the patrol vehicles you list (such as the Mastiff) is also wrong. Finally, let’s all be clear that FRES is neither a protected patrol vehicle nor a replacement for Warrior…”

Given Canada’s poor experiences with wheeled vehicles in Afghanistan, and the Stryker’s emerging difficulties against new IED land mines in Iraq, this may become a recurring subject.

June 8/07: Britain’s MoD announces the FRES finalists. Surprisingly, the SEP vehicles don’t make that list, nor do other test platforms. All of the finalists are wheeled: General Dynamics MOWAG’s Piranha IV, Nexter (formerly Giat’s) VBCI – and the KMW-ARTEC Boxer, which Britain pulled out of several years ago in order to pursue FRES.

The vehicles will go on to the “trials of truth,” and the MoD says the outcome of the trials will be announced by the end of November 2007. At that point, “one or more utility vehicle designs will go forward for detailed assessment.” UK MoD release | Nexter release | KMW release.

May 23/07: Jane’s Defence Weekly reports that ARTEC expects to deliver the first Boxer 8 x 8 MRAV to the German Army on schedule in late 2009, with deliveries to the Royal Netherlands Army following in 2011.

Dec 19/06: At Bernardkazerne in Amersfoort, the Netherlands, a contract is signed for series deliveries of the Boxer Multi-Role Armoured Vehicle to the Netherlands and German armed forces. The series production contract covers up to 272 vehicles for Germany and the 200 vehicles for the Netherlands, with a total value of EUR 1.2 billion (about $1.58 billion), of which Stork will receive EUR 500 million (about $660 million) from 2008 – 2016. Up to 70% of Stork’s turnover will be subcontracted. Deliveries of the vehicles will start in 2009 and extend for seven years.

The contract for Stork encompasses a continued design for 2 new Boxer versions, the series production of 200 Boxer vehicles in 5 versions and an initial in-service support package. The Netherlands army will use the Boxer in 5 different versions: an ambulance vehicle, command post, engineer vehicle, and two types of cargo vehicles. See Stork release.

Dec 13/06: The Budget Committee of the German Bundestag approves MRAV acquisition. Formal signing of an OCCAR acquisition contract by representatives of Germany and the Netherlands is expected to take place on December 19, 2006. The order will reportedly encompass 400 vehicles, 200 of which are earmarked for the German Bundeswehr. Under this contract, the Germans would also have an option for a further 72 units configured as field ambulances. See Rheinmetall release, also KMW release in German.

Oct 13/06: The Dutch Ministerie Van Defensie issues a release noting that the Council of Ministers has approved the purchase of 200 Boxer APCs for the Dutch Army; the final decision now moves on to Parliament (and see Oct 10/06 entry below). The first Boxer MRAVs will enter service in 2011, and deliveries will be complete in 2016. Defense Aerospace’s translation adds some additional information that doesn’t appear to be in the Dutch release, noting that:

“On the basis of information supplied by industry, the operating cost of the Boxer for 200 vehicles over a life span of 30 years was initially estimated at approx. 1,125 million euros (excl VAT). More recent estimates have allowed the Ministry of Defence to reduce the projected life-time operating cost to 938 million euros (excl VAT), based on the best available data.”

In approximate US dollars, the range would be $1.176 billion – $1.41 billion, or about $5.88 – $7.05 million per vehicle over a 30-year operating period.

Oct 10/06: Jane’s International Defence Review reports that The Netherlands national elections scheduled for November 22, 2006 could lead to changes on the defense front. “With the electorate more or less split down the middle, a change of government from the current centre-right coalition to a new centre-left or even 100 per cent-left coalition is not impossible.” Such shifts would have implications for programs like the Boxer MRAV. As it happens, the Dutch elections produced losses for all major parties and left Parliament in a similar balance.

Additional Readings & Sources

• ARTEC Boxer official site
• Stork NV – Boxer. The subsidiary tasked with production is Stork PWV, who has this Boxer page, and also the Stork Special Products page that includes details re: some of Stork’s sub-projects within the program.
• KMW – Boxer Wheeled Vehicle
• Rheinmetall Defence – Boxer
• Army Technology – Boxer MRAV Wheeled Multi-Role Armoured Vehicle, Europe
• Ministerie van Defensie (June 28/06) – Kamer Steunt Voortgang Boxer
• Janes (May 22/06) – Revised bid aims to put Boxer back in the ring
• Ministerie van Defensie (June 21/06) – Nederland Gaat Door Met Boxer Pantservoertuig
• Janes (Oct 3/05) – Boxer misses key pricing deadline

The 14 variants in the Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles (FMTV) form the core of the USA’s new state-of-the-art medium military transport truck fleet. Which in turn forms the core of the “mature logistics capability” seen in the Iraqi theater and elsewhere. FMTV trucks are all automatic transmission, and range from 2.5-ton cargo and van models to 5-ton cargo, tractor, van, wrecker, tanker, specialty, and dump-truck models in various 4×4 and 6×6 configurations. Some models also have attached trailers that increase their carrying capacity. Even so, the use of common engines, transmissions, drivelines, power trains, tires, cabs, etc. create over 80% parts commonality between FMTV models. Where possible, commercial components are used for added savings.

There have been 3 main phases of the FMTV program, including the last “SO23” open competition in 2003. All told, more than 50,000 FMTV trucks in various models have been delivered to the US Army. A bridging order to BAE continued production in Sealy, TX from 2008 through 2010, but the 4th phase re-compete saw a new firm begin FMTV production – alongside heavy truck production for the Army (FHTV) and Marines (LVSR), and medium trucks for the US Marine Corps (MTVR).

FMTV Program & Production

Under the new contract, Oshkosh Corp. has been awarded a competitive, 5-year requirements contract to build up to 12,415 trucks and 10,926 trailers, and provide associated support and engineering services. The total estimated contract value at award was $3.023 billion.

BAE Systems subsidiary Stewart & Stevenson won the initial FMTV competition to begin producing these trucks, and has retained the manufacturing contract through previous rebuy competitions, a merger with Armor Holdings, and Armor Holding’s absorption into BAE. The current FMTV rebuy program is a 5-year requirements contract award for up to 23,000 vehicles and trailers, as well as support services and engineering. The addition of support services is significant, and can amount to a notable portion of the contract’s full value over time.

Subsequent reports indicate that for this re-buy program, BAE Systems submitted a bid 20% lower than the current FMTV price, despite a supply chain for FMTV that is 60% directed source (i.e. sub-contractors and parts specified by the government). Oshkosh’s bid was reportedly 33% below the current FMTV price.

In addition to their role as the backbone of the US Army’s truck fleet, FMTV trucks serve as the base for key weapons systems like the future MEADS air-defense system and the new HIMARS air-portable multiple rocket launchers, and as the base for some blast-resistant vehicles like BAE’s Caiman. These designs are excluded from the FMTV re-buy.

Even without these specialty variants, FMTV production has ramped up sharply over the last few years. Initial rates of production were approximately 2,400 trucks per year, but that rate has now accelerated to 7,200 (about 32/day) and was expected to reach over 8,000 per year (about 42/day) at BAE’s plant in Sealy, TX during FY 2009.

Heavy use in theater and casualties of chance or battle have contributed somewhat to this production ramp-up, but other factors also play a major role. One is the desire to grow the US Army by over 60,000 soldiers. The importance of logistics means that more soldiers will need more trucks, especially as the regular army focuses on assuming more of the sustainment role that has traditionally been assigned to the National Guard and Reserves. Meanwhile, those military reserve forces are driving 30 and even 40 year old trucks that are reaching the end of any useful life cycle, and must be replaced quickly.

These factors mean that the FMTV’s production pace is unlikely to abate much, creating high hurdles for Oshkosh to meet. Fortunately, intellectual property rights are not an issue, as the government owns the blueprints. On the other hand, even “build-to-print” contracts usually end up accommodating contractor-specific systems and improvements. FMTV design had been frozen at the A1P2 version prior to this recompete, in order to ensure a level playing field, but a successful award opens the door to a new development and enhancement schedule. That was part of initial and ongoing discussions with the US Army, as Oshkosh prepared to ramp up its own FMTV production. So far, the transition is going well.

Budgets and production orders under this new contract include:

• FY 2010: $1.438 billion ($5.5M RDT&E, $1.344 billion procurement for 8,637).
  
• FY 2011 request: $1.438 billion ($3.7M RDT&E, $1.435 billion procurement for 4,652).
  
• FY 2012 request: $ 448 million ($4.0M RDT&E, $ 432.9M procurement for 2,390, $11.1M supplemental funding for 32 more to make 2,442).

Contracts and Key Events

The current FMTV rebuy program is a 5-year firm-fixed-price requirements contract award that was originally intended for up to 23,000 vehicles and trailers, as well as support services and engineering. It has now surpassed those totals. Unless otherwise noted, US Army TACOM Life Cycle Management Command in Warren, MI, manages the contracts, and Oshkosh Corp. in Oshkosh, WI is the contractor. Bids for the original contract were solicited on the World Wide Web, with 3 bids received.

January 18/17: Israel’s Defense Ministry has contracted Oshkosh Defense to provide 200 FMTV tactical trucks. Valued at $200 million, the deal comes after vigorous field testing by Israel of six trucks to ensure the firm’s Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles (FMTV) meets Israeli requirements. It’s expected that this order will be added too, as Tel Aviv begins the replacement of the nearly 60-year old tactical trucks currently used by its logistics branch.

September 24/15: Oshkosh Defense has been handed a $47 million modification to add an additional 184 medium tactical vehicles to a $4.7 billion Foreign Military Sales order in 2009, with the new vehicles headed for Iraq. The vehicles are scheduled for delivery by February 2017.

April 13/12: A $60.1 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for FMTVs. Work will be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of Sept 30/14 (W56HZV-09-D-0159).

April 2/12: A $294.7 million firm-fixed-price contract for FMTV support services. Oshkosh, on the other hand, says the contract will buy “more than 2,500” FMTV trucks and trailers for the U.S. Army, and adds that the US Army has now ordered “more than 29,000” FMTV trucks and trailers from them. From a program standpoint, that would be on top of previous orders to Armor Holdings and its eventual buyer, BAE Systems.

Work will be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of Sept 30/14 (W56HAV-09-D-0159). See also Oshkosh release.

March 30/12: The Pentagon’s Selected Acquisitions Report ending Dec 31/11 includes FMTV, and isn’t good news for Oshkosh:

“Program costs decreased $1,965.7 million (-10.5%) from $18,731.4 million to $16,765.7 million, due primarily to a quantity decrease of 7,463 trucks from 87,839 to 80,376 trucks (-$1,266.1 million) and associated schedule, engineering, and estimating allocations

• (-$504.1 million). The quantity decrease also lowered estimates for non-recurring engineering, specifically, program management, non-recurring testing, and in-house and contractor engineering costs (-$135.2 million). There were additional decreases for unit cost savings from Engineering Change Proposal (ECP) definitization (-$146.8 million). These decreases were partially offset by the application of revised escalation indices (+$80.4 million).”

Feb 23/12: Oshkosh Defense unveils its “FMTV Enhanced Protection & Mobility Demonstrator” (EPMD) at AUSA Winter. The prototype vehicle utilizes the same Oshkosh TAK-4 independent suspension system that equips USMC trucks, and which is retrofitting many Army MRAPs. That change will improve mobility, while a custom-fitted Oshkosh Underbody Improvement Kit (UIK) improves protection against land mines.

These changes are important on a business level, because Oshkosh was depending on sales of upgrades and improved versions, in order to offset its unprofitable base bid (vid. Jan 9/12). Now the question becomes whether the US Army will bite.

Feb 3/12: Proxy battle win. Oshkosh’s 8-K/A filing says that all 13 of the corporation’s nominated Board members were elected, and all 6 of the Icahn Group’s nominees were defeated.

Icahn came close to getting a seat on the Board for his group, and that 13th seat had to wait for the full count, but overall, it’s a pretty stinging rebuff. The company nominee with the fewest share votes was Harvey N. Medvin, at 40,619,097; 5 of his 12 colleagues received over 79 million share votes. The Icahn nominee with the most share votes was Samuel Merksamer, at 39,016,262; 3 of his 5 colleagues received less than 15.5 million share votes, and those 3 were the only nominees to have more “withheld” votes than affirmative votes.

Jan 17/12: A $17.1 million firm-fixed-price contract modification to buy FMTV air conditioning install kits. Work will be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of Oct 31/13 (W56HZV-09-D-0159).

Jan 17/12: Oshkosh touts endorsements of its Board of Directors slate from independent proxy advisory firms Glass Lewis & Co. (Glass Lewis) and Egan-Jones Proxy Services (Egan-Jones). Voting is Jan 27/12.

Jan 9/12: Proxy battle – I choose you, Pikachu! The proxy skirmish with Icahn turns into a war – and the FMTV contract is a prominent feature. Icahn’s SEC DFAN14A materials express concern about the coming FHTV re-bid, and identify Oshkosh’s FMTV win strategy as 1 of 2 devastating strategic mistakes (the 2006 JLG acquisition being the other) that have consumed management’s attention and driven down profitability, even as other business segments have floundered and need focus:

“We believe that the FMTV represents the single largest problem with the future of this company… We believe this unprofitable contract represents management’s unrealistic attitude and poor planning, as well as the board’s lack of oversight on a product that represents over half of segment revenue.”

Oshkosh management’s filing points to the JLG acquisition as key to its M-ATV MRAP win, cites growing market share in defense, and asks for shareholders to wait for its markets to pick up. It directly attacks Icahn’s Board candidates as, in effect, a bunch of dependent puppets with little relevant experience in its key segments of defense or construction, and poor records with other companies. Management adds that Mr. Icahn has tried to circumvent Wisconsin’s business combination statute for shareholder protection, alleges that he had offered no substantive ideas to Oshkosh management when asked (though his DFAN14A has clear positions), and states that he refused to discuss his analysis behind the Navistar merger recommendation. In its 8-K filing, however, Oshkosh management make a concession, by pledging to “report profit on its Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles contract for the first quarter of fiscal 2012.”

The facts of the matter do make it appear that the Army played its FMTV hand well, and Oshkosh chose a strategy that failed at every point. As BAE surmised at the time, given the value of Army-specified sub-contracts, Oshkosh’s bid could not be profitable, and has not been. Worse, the Army chose not to be interested in enhancements, which would have restored some profit for Oshkosh; they also front-loaded FMTV purchases, before price-escalation clauses in the contract could kick in. Though this acquisition approach drove down short-term costs, in the long term, it could actually backfire on the Army by destroying 2 key suppliers. With BAE’s Sealy, TX truck plant largely emptied of work and staff, an analysis from the Lexington Institute sounds a cautionary note for the US Army, and wonders if its procurement victory will prove as pyrrhic as Oshkosh’s:

“[Oshkosh] finds itself in this predicament because it made some ill-timed acquisitions at the top of the sub-prime real estate boom (most notable lift-maker JLG), and then sought to compensate for its error by bidding very aggressively on Army truck contracts… workers would not be the only victims of the [proposed Navistar merger]… [A commercial suppliers strategy] ignores the loss of control implied for the Army customer. When you are by far the biggest source of demand for a company’s products, then you can pretty much dictate the terms of the relationship. When you are only one of many customers, you have less influence… The fact that submerging Oshkosh into the Navistar culture will give the Army fewer competitive options in the future is fine with [Icahn]; that’s how you get pricing power.”

It all comes to a head on Jan 27/12. See: Oshkosh 8-K | Oshkosh management’s SEC DEFA14A filing (see esp. pp. 38-44) | Icahn Group DFAN14A arguments | The Street | Reuters | Lexington Institute analysis.

Jan 5/12: A $27.3 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for more FMTVs. Work will be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of June 30/13. The original bid was solicited through the Internet, with 3 bids received by US Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI (W56HZV-09-D-0159).

Jan 5/12: A $7.6 million firm-fixed-price contract modification to support FMTVs. Work will be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of Oct 13/13. The original bid was solicited through the Internet, with 3 bids received by US Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI (W58HZV-09-D-0159).

Dec 6/11: Navistar/Oshkosh merger? Billionaire Carl Icahn owns 10% of Navistar, and 9.51% of Oshkosh, so his comments that the 2 companies should merge draws a lot of attention. He tells CNBC:

“I definitely think it would be a good merger. I think there would be a lot of synergy. I own stock in both and I think shareholders of both companies would benefit.”

Both Boards of Directors are maneuvering defensively around Icahn. Navistar agreed to put its Board up for election each year, but agreed not to propose his own slate of directors at the annual meeting. Things are a bit more open at Oshkosh, where Icahn is proposing Board slates, and has been increasingly critical of existing management.

Nov 10/11: A $19.1 million firm-fixed-price contract for 129 FMTVs; 11 armor B-Kits; 20 FMTVs; and 20 FMTV “High Mobility Artillery Rocket System B-Kits; with install for United Arab Emirates.” Work will be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of June 30/13 (W56HZV-09-D-0159).

The wording above is somewhat unclear, but Oshkosh has now confirmed that the UAE order is just 20 trailers and armoring B-kits. The UAE has an active HIMARS program, which began with their September 2006 DSCA request. As a Feb 3/09 announcement from BAE suggested, the UAE had already bought its FMTV chassis.

Sept 29/11: A $30 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for 452 FMTV family trucks, and 86 up-armoring B-kits. Work will be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of June 30/13 (W56HZV-09-D-0159).

According to DID’s records, based on announced contracts, this brings the total number of FMTV trucks ordered under this new contract to 23,665, plus 2,806 trailers, and 127 up-armoring B-kits, at a cost of about $3.69 billion.

Aug 1/11: A $904.2 million firm-fixed-price contract modification to procure 6,963 FMTV truck variants. Work will be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of June 30/13 (W56HZV-09-D-0159). See also Oshkosh release.

Aug 1/11: James Hasik’s new research service offers a timely memorandum, asking how much money Oshkosh is losing on its FMTV contract: “Just how much money is Oshkosh losing on the FMTV contract? And should the customer care?.”

That has long been suspected, as over 60% of the FMTV truck’s cost is fixed-price, mandatory “directed source” items from subcontractors, and Oshkosh’s bid was reportedly 33% below the SO23 contract’s FMTV price. Using information from past orders, such as those listed here, he gets average current contract costs of $181,000 per truck and $71,000 per trailer, which seems to match up with order totals so far. Further estimates involving relative truck production rates, relative value, and announced margin rates for the defense division:

“…give us estimates of -21% as the FMTV margin in Q2 2011, -15% as the FMVT [sic] margin in Q3 2011… with some slightly different assumptions, I got margins of -10% and -6%.1 As the FMTV contract will account for at least $150 million of Oshkosh Defense’s business over the next five years, taking losses can’t be shrugged off… as Charlie Szews has taken personal control at Defense, the problem has clearly been recognized. And indeed, if the overall margin is improving with increasing volume, then they’re not losing money on every truck. It’s not as though the value of the bill of material exceeds the sale price. There’s a positive contribution margin, so there’s hope that things might work out… Today, we have the beginnings of ex post measures – actual, if inferred, performance on the contract. Losing 15 percent on a $295 million gig means that you’re spending $347 million to get that 295; in short, that’s a $52 million quarterly loss. Yet quite apart from the commercial business, Defense is still grossing about a billion dollars quarterly, and the bonanza of the M-ATV work is almost at an end. So that bid on the FMTV contract, which now seems to have been hazardous, should still not prove fatal. Oshkosh may yet turn it around, but even if it doesn’t, only Oshkosh’s shareholders will suffer.”

While Hasik’s concern is focused on whether the contract would endanger Oshkosh as a company, there’s also an industrial base issue, wherein a supplier bids below cost, in order to drive a competitor out of business and secure a monopoly or near monopoly position with respect to American production facilities. That’s precisely the situation in the Boeing/Airbus tanker competition, which will also cost taxpayers above and beyond the bid price. It’s likely that as the defense business contracts under spending cuts, we’ll see more of this behavior. It isn’t clear that the US DoD has thought about this issue, and determined the best guidelines for responding.

July 25/11: A $30.5 million firm-fixed-price contract for 185 FMTV trucks and 1 armor B-kit. Work will be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of April 3/13 (W56HZV-09-D-0159).

June 14/11: A $7 million firm-fixed-price contract for 44 FMTVs. The contract runs until March 31/12 (W56HZV-09-D-0159).

April 20/11: A $71.8 million firm-fixed-price contract for 417 FMTVs of different types. Work will be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of March 31/12 (W56HZV-09-D-0159).

April 15/11: The Pentagon’s Selected Acquisitions Report ending Dec 30/10 includes FMTV program changes – but they cost adjustments are downward:

“Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles (FMTV) – Program costs decreased $1,895.2 million (-9.2 percent) from $20,626.6 million to $18,731.4 million, due primarily to reductions in costs resulting from the award of a new competitive re-buy contract (-$2,308.6 million), acceleration of the procurement buy profile (-$328.9 million), and a change in the model mix (-$230.4 million). There are additional decreases for fielding and non-recurring costs (-$236.7 million) and other support (-$149.1 million) due to early completion of the program. These decreases are partially offset by a quantity increase of 4,654 trucks from 83,185 to 87,839 trucks (+$786.5 million) and associated schedule, engineering, and estimating allocations

• (+$588.8 million).”
• Note: Quantity changes are estimated based on the original SAR baseline cost-quantity relationship. Cost changes since the original baseline are separately categorized as schedule, engineering, or estimating “allocations.” The total impact of a quantity change is the identified “quantity” change plus all associated “allocations.”

Feb 28/11: A $25.2 million firm-fixed-price contract for 315 FMTV medium trucks, 3 B-Kits, and program support. Work will be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of March 31/12 (W56HZV-09-D-0159).

According to DID’s records, based on announced contracts, this brings the total number of FMTV trucks ordered under this new contract to 15,604.

Feb 14/11: The Pentagon issues its FY 2012 budget request, even as the new 112th Congress is forced to debate a FY 2011 budget, in order to repair the failure of the 111th Congress to pass one. The FY 2010-2011 requests were around $1.4 billion, but FY 2012’s request drops sharpy to $448 million for a total of 2,442 more FMTV trucks).

Dec 3/10: A $413.2 million firm-fixed-price contract for 1,800 family of medium tactical vehicles for the US Army National Guard. Work will be performed in Oshkosh, WI with an estimated completion date of March 12/13 (W56HZV-09-D-0159).

Dec 3/10: A $100.1 million firm-fixed-price contract for 1,800 family of medium tactical vehicles for the US Army National Guard. Work will be performed in Oshkosh, WI with an estimated completion date of March 12/13 (W56HZV-09-D-0159). DID is investigating the discrepancy in these figures.

Nov 19/10: As final deliveries from BAE Systems continue, and initial deliveries from Oshkosh begin, the U.S. Army is busy testing the new FMTV trucks at Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD, and Yuma Proving Ground, AZ. Lt. Col. Shane Fullmer, the Army’s product manager for medium tactical vehicles:

“Testing is going very well. The process involves 20,000 miles of reliability and durability testing – plus performance testing which is everything from [performance on] slopes to speed, endurance and payload capability… Given what we’ve seen to date, we are in good shape to easily meet our reliability requirements.”

The trucks are also subject to live fire blast testing, and performance testing including fording, hill grade/ payload tests, pull capability for tractors, etc. Testing is expected to conclude in the spring of 2011. US Army.

Nov 19/10: A $797.9 million firm-fixed-price contract for 4,773 FMTV trucks – though the Oshkosh release says that 590 trailers are part of that total, meaning truck orders are just 4,183. Work will be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of March 31/12. Oshkosh is more exact: deliveries are scheduled to begin in September 2011, and finish in August 2012. (W56HZV-09-D-0159).

Based on announced contracts listed in this article, the current rebuy program has issued $2.1 billion in contracts so far, to buy 13,239 trucks, 1,156 trailers, and 37 armoring b-Kits.

Sept 10/10: A $260.1 million firm-fixed-price contract for the production of 2,060 FMTVs. Work is to be performed in Oshkosh, WI with an estimated completion date of March 31/12. (W56HZV-09-D-0159). Oshkosh release

Sept 3/10: A $20.5 million firm-fixed-price contract for 122 FMTV vehicles by March 31/12, with work to be performed at Oshkosh, WI (W56HZV-09-D-0159).

Aug 16/10: A $201.5 million firm-fixed-price contract for 1,288 FMTV trucks. Work is to be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of March 31/12 (W56HZV-09-D-0159).

July 2/10: A $105.6 million firm-fixed-price contract for 621 FMTV trucks, and 43 trailers. Work will be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of March 31/12 (W56HZV-09-D-0159).

July 2/10: A $30.9 million firm-fixed-price contract for 167 FMTV trucks, 37 armor b-kits, and 119 trailers. Work will be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of March 31/12 (W56HZV-09-D-0159).

May 27/10: Oshkosh Defense ships its first FMTV trucks and trailers to the U.S. Army, including a Long-Term Armor Strategy (LTAS)-compliant cab. The 2 trucks represent 2 different FMTV variants and their trailers, and were shipped ahead of schedule. The original timeline had Oshkosh Defense beginning to deliver full production units in October 2010. Oshkosh Defense.

May 10/10: Oshkosh Corp. in Oshkosh, WI receives a $410.1 million firm-fixed-price contract for 2,230 FMTV family trucks, and 404 trailers, for deliveries scheduled between March and December 2011. To date, Oshkosh Corporation has received orders valued at more than $690 million under the new FMTV contract, and the company will begin supplying initial trucks to the Army this month for performance and durability testing. Production deliveries will begin in October 2010, and the contract’s formal completion date is March 31/12. (W56HZV-09-D-0159).

As part of its efforts, Oshkosh Corporation has also broken ground on a new 150,000-square-foot, state-of-the-art electrocoat (E-coat) facility in Oshkosh, WI, to support the FMTV program, and possibly other programs. The E-coat facility will help ensure corrosion protection, one of the FMTV fleet’s key attributes in order to meet its demanding time-of-service requirements; competitor BAE Systems had an operational E-coat facility of its own in Sealy, TX, but that may now be closed. Start-up of Oshkosh’s facility will begin in late summer 2010, and the firm is also moving into a new building in Warren, MI for FMTV System Technical Support (STS) work. The firm expects to hire up to 190 new employees. See also Oshkosh Defense release.

April 27/10: The Oshkosh award may end up complicating life for the M142 HIMARS rocket launcher program, fielded by the US Army and Marines, and by several foreign militaries. The Army has 2 more years of buying HIMARS, but there’s a 14-month lag from contract award to delivery. The Army planned to procure its last 44 BAE chassis for the HIMARS system in FY 2011 under its bridging contract, but BAE is expected to discontinue FMTV production during the period of time it would take to build the chassis.

Col. Dave Rice, program manager for precision fires, rocket and missile systems, added that BAE’s Increased Crew Protection (ICP) cab for the HIMARS is a proprietary design. The Army will “have to see if the cab changes are militarily significant,” and then decide what to do. Gannett’s Army Times.

April 23/10: A bnet columnist criticizes Michigan for awarding Oshkosh a tax break, in order to do what it had to do anyway:

“As part of the contract, Oshkosh Defense agreed to establish a technical center in Michigan that will eventually employ up to 200 people. The office will be located on the site of the closed Detroit Arsenal Tank Plant. The Army office that manages vehicle acquisition is located in the area, so it makes sense for Oshkosh to have people nearby.

And there’s the rub. The state gave Oshkosh a $6.4 million tax credit to help build the facility. This is part of a “renaissance zone” program to revitalize older, existing industrial sites. Oshkosh won’t pay taxes until 2011 at the earliest and then it might well be at a reduced rate.

The question is: Does Oshkosh need the help? The company would have needed an office, anyway, to manage both the MRAP-ATV and the FMTV contracts. So it appears that Michigan is essentially paying some of Oshkosh’s costs. Considering that the state is running a $1 billion budget deficit (after $1 billion in spending cuts), it’s hard to justify giving Oshkosh tax breaks to do something it was already planning to do.”

Feb 12/10: Oshkosh keeps the award. US Department of Defense:

“The Department of the Army announced today that it has re-evaluated the contract award decision for its Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles (FMTV) originally made on Aug. 26, 2009. This change was based on Government Accountability Office’s (GAO) recommendations. Accordingly, Oshkosh Corp. has been awarded a competitive, five-year requirements contract for production of up to 12,415 trucks, 10,926 trailers, and associated support and engineering services. The total estimated contract value at award was $3.023 billion… From Dec. 21, 2009, to Jan. 22, 2010, the Army re-evaluated the proposals in accordance with the GAO’s recommendation. Subsequently, there was an Office of the Secretary of Defense peer review affirming the Army’s reevaluation process.”

Oshkosh celebrated the award in a corporate release, while BAE Systems was forced to notify its investors:

“…the Group will include in its 2009 accounts an impairment of goodwill and other intangible assets amounting to [GBP] 592 million relating to the Armor Holdings Inc. transaction and specifically the FMTV product line.”

The news is a major blow to BAE Systems’ $4.53 billion acquisition of Armor Holdings. With its core FMTV business about to end, MRAP production finished, and the M-ATV competition lost to Oshkosh, much now rides on the JLTV competition. At the same time, BAE Systems’ UK facilities recently announced potential job losses in its submarine business, and a minor trimming of its Nimrod-related workforce.

Dec 14/09: Congress’ Government Accountability Office issues its decision, recommending that the Army reevaluate the offerors’ capability evaluation factor, and make a new selection decision. GAO managing associate general Michael Golden said that:

“Our review of the record led us to conclude that the Army’s evaluation was flawed with regard to the evaluation of Oshkosh’s proposal under the capability evaluation factor, and the evaluation of Navistar’s past performance… We also denied a number of Navistar’s and BAE’s challenges to the award to Oshkosh, including challenges to the evaluation of Oshkosh’s price.”

By statute, the Army now has 60 days to inform the GAO of its response to the GAO’s recommendations. BAE Systems welcomes the decision, while looking forward “to reviewing the full GAO report and its recommendations so we can fully consider the implications for our business and our options…” Oshkosh Corporation Chairman and CEO Robert G. Bohn said in their corporate release that challenges to the evaluation of the Oshkosh Corporation price had been denied, adding that:

“It is important to realize that today’s decision did not recommend proposal revisions nor did it recommend termination of our contract… We believe that when these narrow issues are reconsidered, the Army’s decision to award Oshkosh Corporation the FMTV contract will be maintained.”

See: Redacted GAO decision [PDF] | Navistar release | Oshkosh release | The Hill.

Nov 19/09: Oshkosh discusses its efforts to secure tax breaks from the city of Oshkosh, as it plans to expand its manufacturing facilities by adding a new 150,000-square-foot electrocoat (E-coat) painting facility for FMTV production. The company plans to break ground on the new E-coat facility in December 2009, with start up beginning late summer 2010. Oshkosh | The Northwestern.

The financing package would have the city provide up to $5 million in tax incremental financing (TIF), while the state would provide $35 million in tax credits and other assistance for the plant. The TIF district is pending approval by the Oshkosh Common Council. BAE Systems promptly weighs in, of course:

“BAE Systems has two electrostatic E-Coat stations at our Sealy, Texas facility, one for large parts and one for small parts. As outlined on p. 41 of the redacted second supplemental protest document, the Army’s FMTV re-buy solicitation provided that: “An offeror that currently has existing facilities that can be utilized, or modified to build FMTV vehicles may be determined to be less risky than an offeror that has to acquire facilities to produce vehicles on the contract.” E-Coat is a requirement to build FMTV and is at the heart of its corrosion protection. Parts must be completely immersed in electrophoretic paint emulsion, at which point an electrical charge is run through both and then the parts are drained entirely.

As we read of our competitor seeking taxpayer assistance to build a new E-coat facility – in a very short time frame – to meet the requirements of the FMTV contract, we find it totally inconsistent with the source selection criteria to believe that BAE Systems, with two E-coat facilities in current operation, is considered equal in risk with a company that doesn’t have this essential capability and is looking for the taxpayers to pay for it.”

Nov 18/09: BAE Systems holds a teleconference to discuss their protest, and the recent GAO hearings. A GAO decision is expected by Dec 14/09, which is the 100th day, in conformance with GAO rules.

One clarification up front is that FMTV variants used as part of other weapons system, such as HIMARS rocket launchers, SLAMRAAM air defense systems, MEADS air defense systems, and the FMTV Low-Velocity Airdrop version used by airborne forces, were all removed from the re-buy competition in February 2009. Program managers for those systems will apparently make those decisions, but BAE does have some unique intellectual property in those vehicles’ current designs. If lack of production orders causes BAE to shutter their Sealy, TX facility, the firm would have to begin production of those variants elsewhere at added cost; alternatively, any competitor selected instead would have to replicate and test the vehicles’ mission-specific design features, either at its own expense or at the government’s. The derivative Caiman MRAP was never part of the FMTV re-buy, and remains BAE’s intellectual property.

In response to questions from DID regarding the applicability of Oshkosh’s rapidly fielded and produced M-ATV MRAP as a risk-evaluation precedent, BAE representatives made several points. The core of those points was that M-ATV was an internally-held design, whereas FMTV is a government-held TDP (technical documentation), which does not include all of the know-how needed to build the vehicle, and has a much longer and more involved process for changes. In conjunction with a production schedule that resembles M-ATV’s aggressiveness, and the production of only 1 FMTV prototype from Oshkosh to date, BAE believes this represents added risk.

BAE Systems also believes there’s a question around the FMTV A1 LTAS-compliant (Long Term Armoring Strategy) cab design, which is currently BAE’s design. Competitors must re-design that cab, and replicate and test the A1P2 cab’s level of protection, which is just being fielded now. An Aug 13/09 Oshkosh release says that Oshkosh has done this design work at its own expense, but the release does not mention testing; BAE’s protest includes their observation that a design which requires testing and verification adds production and design risk.

Finally, with respect to reports from sources like the Lexington Institute (vid. Nov 4/09 entry), BAE representatives confirmed that Oshkosh’s $3 billion total evaluated price bid underbid the current FMTV price in the neighborhood of 30%, but add that BAE’s re-buy bid price was lower, too. The government, “for whatever reason,” published Oshkosh’s contract bid on their web site, down to variant level pricing. BAE systems knows the trucks very well, and fully 60% of the trucks’ value is directed source, which means the winning contractor must use those suppliers. BAE representatives do not believe that Oshkosh’s prices are realistic, and display similar skepticism regarding some of the elements of Oshkosh’s insourcing claims.

Oshkosh Defense was contacted regarding BAE claims, but chose not to respond.

Nov 18/09: The Greater Houston Partnership business advocacy umbrella organization releases the results of their study, which claims that the region would lose 3,400 direct jobs and 6,766 indirect jobs if Oshkosh retains the contract, with other effect spreading beyond to the state of Texas. The Partnership is joining other Sealy FMTV Task Force members in calling on the Army to put the contract out for a re-bid – in effect, a do-over. PR Newswire release.

Nov 17/09: BAE Systems releases a redacted version of its protest to the public, following agreement from the GAO and even Oshkosh. Its core allegation is that the buy was not best value, but became a solely price-based competition that disregarded risk factors. The protest also cites other past GAO cases that it believes to be analogous. Redacted FMTV Protest [PDF, 6.5 MB].

Nov 9-10/09: The GAO holds hearings regarding the FMTV protest. GAO hearings usually held when there are conflicting factual issues, and the dispute cannot be resolved merely from submissions. This is longer than usual for such hearings, but reports indicate that an array of Army witnesses were called.

Nov 4/09: Loren Thompson of The Lexington Institute predicts that the GAO will overturn the Army’s decision:

“Let’s revisit what happened in that competition, and ask whether a protest seems warranted…[The Army] made the award after concluding that incumbent BAE Systems and Oshkosh were essentially equal in all non-cost selection criteria, but that Oshkosh offered a more attractive price… On price, the Army accepted a bid from Oshkosh that is 30% below the price BAE Systems is currently charging for the vehicle – even though Oshkosh, with no direct experience in manufacturing the product, must turn out a vehicle with the same performance specifications and features, using many of the same suppliers. When challengers to an established producer offer such huge price reductions to win a contract, it is standard procedure to conduct a rigorous analysis of how realistic the challenger’s price is. Yet there is little evidence the Army made any such effort… leveling of non-cost factors… allowed… a “best value” award solely on the basis of price. But unlike BAE, Oshkosh did not have all production facilities or tooling in place; its workforce was not experienced in building FMTV trucks; it did not have established relationships with all suppliers; and it did not have a validated design for the required armored cab in the vehicle. So to say the rivals represented equivalent risk is simply not believable – especially given the very aggressive price targets Oshkosh’s bid required it to meet. GAO will see this award for what it was, and act accordingly.”

See: Issue Brief | Subsequent elaboration.

Oct 16/09: BAE Systems files another supplemental protest to the GAO:

“…after finding additional concerns with the source selection process during the U.S. Army’s Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles (FMTV) rebuy competition… BAE Systems is increasingly convinced the service’s source selection evaluation was flawed and that the Army did not follow its own stated objective to conduct a best-value FMTV competition based on a clear-cut set of criteria… BAE Systems is requesting that a redacted version of the supplemental protest be made available publicly. In order for release of a redacted supplemental protest, all parties involved in the matter must agree to its release.”

Sept 11/09: BAE Systems files a supplemental protest.

Sept 4/09: Both BAE Systems and Navistar Defense file GAO protests (file# 401865.2, 401865.1) regarding the FMTV award to Oshkosh. BAE:

“BAE Systems has filed a protest with the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), asking the agency to review the decision by the U.S. Army to award a contract to a competitor for the Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles (FMTV) rebuy program. After a detailed analysis of the information provided by the Army, before and during the formal competition debrief, the Company believes that the Army did not properly evaluate the proposals, consistent with the Government’s stated requirements, and the Army failed accurately to assess the various risks associated with the different proposals.”

The GAO protests will put the FMTV re-buy contract on hold until a decision is rendered. A decision is expected by Dec 14/09.

Aug 26/09: Oshkosh wins the FMTV production re-compete, and an initial $280.9 million order for 2,568 trucks and trailers, plus OY 01 data, additional care and storage, component first article test, first production vehicle inspection test, production verification test, live test family medium tactical vehicles winch, armor B-kits, and federal retail tax. Work is to be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with initial test vehicle deliveries are planned for mid-2010, followed by production vehicle deliveries later in that year. With an estimated completion date of April 30/10 for this order. Bids were solicited on the World Wide Web with 3 bids received by TACOM LCMC Warren, AMSCC-TAC-ATB in Warren, MI (W56HZV-09-D-0159).

Wisconsin Governor Jim Doyle is quoted as saying that the total contract could be worth up to $2.6 billion and create 2,000 production jobs in the state. That’s definitely conservative, with other analysts placing the value closer to $4.5 billion, plus maintenance. Through the state’s Enterprise Zone program, Wisconsin will provide up to $35 million in tax credits over the next 12 years to support the project. In response to the win, Oshkosh CEO Robert Bohn reportedly said that “We’ve been known for a long, long time as a manufacturer that delivers on time and I think that helped us.” While it certainly didn’t hurt, BAE Systems had its own strong delivery record, including the top ranking among MRAP vehicle suppliers. It is very likely that the key differentiators lay elsewhere; tellingly, Oshkosh would not comment on pricing.

Over the past 17 years, Armor Holdings/BAE Systems has delivered more than 56,000 FMTV trucks and trailers, which have maintained a 94% average operational readiness rate in both Iraq and Afghanistan. BAE’s financial planning assumed FMTV-related sales and maintenance activities of about $2 billion in each of 2009 and 2010, dropping to less than $1 billion per year from 2011 onward. BAE announced that it “will continue to fulfill these commitments and consider its options as it carefully reviews the Army’s latest decision.” Translation: a protest is possible. Its absence would be surprising in the current climate, given the contract’s potential value.

FMTV bridge buys and maintenance efforts will continue using BAE Systems on Sealy, TX over 2009 and 2010, per the existing bridge-buy contract and partnership with Red River Army Depot. During this period, Oshkosh will make preparations, discuss final design details with the US Army, and ramp up production.

The long-term earnings hit, and implicit questions regarding the current value of its $4.5 billion Armor Holdings acquisition in 2007, sent BAE’s stock sliding. With MRAP production ended, MRAP-ATV going to Oshkosh, and its FMTV mainstay removed, BAE Systems’ American land vehicle strategy has taken a series of body blows that make the future JLTV competition even more important to the firm. Oshkosh stock has gone in a different direction, in the wake of a sole-source award to continue producing the US Army’s FHTV heavy trucks, its status as the ongoing manufacturer of the US Marines’ medium (MTVR) and heavy (LVSR) truck fleets, and a recent multi-billion win in the blast-resistant M-ATV competition that will also make them a contender for the larger JLTV Hummer replacement buy. See: Oshkosh Defense | BAE Systems | Milwaukee Business Journal | Bloomberg | UK’s Financial Times | Reuters.

May 27/09: BAE Systems submits its bid for the FMTV re-compete. Their corporate release touts over 17 years of experience, during which their 2,700 person facility in Sealy, TX has manufactured more than 53,000 FMTV trucks and trailers in 21 variants.

BAE is touting the strength of its workforce and its embedded knowledge that goes beyond the blueprints, and into production processes, efficiency, and proven flexibility. The delivery record for FMTV and its derivative Caimin MRAP vehicles has been excellent; indeed, Caimin was the #1 MRAP vehicle in its ratio of on-time to promised deliveries. Then, too, there is the specialized infrastructure like BAE’s Sealy e-coat facility, and privately developed off-blueprint additions like “miles to go on this tank” indicators and other enhancements.

May 27/09: Oshkosh submits its bid for the FMTV A1P2 re-buy contract. Their main competitor is a Sealy, TX incumbent with a formidable performance record of its own. In that situation, Oshkosh’s required priorities are twofold: (1) Avoid anything that might tip the scales against them, even slightly. That means driving perceived performance risk as close to zero as possible, and creating a net zero for political risks; and (2) produce a proposal that offers credible improvements in price and/or performance, against a very strong competitor.

In discussions with DID, the firm outlined the core of its case. Assuming a level playing field, the key criteria for this contract are price and past performance. Oshkosh believes they have a very credible, fact-based price derived from their own experiences building about 10,000 MTVR medium trucks for the Marines, and the fact that almost 90% of FMTV suppliers are already Oshkosh suppliers.

In terms of past performance risk, they pointed to the fact that their integrated production line has conducted simultaneous production of 10 models, totaling 29 variants – a record that matches well with the FMTV re-buy’s high mix/ low individual volume schedule. Oshkosh also touts its performance in the area of engineering and logistics support, which has become an integral aspect of the FMTV program. Their work with MTVR and the Army’s FHTV heavy truck family gives them a very wide field support network, and the firm cites its fast delivery and fielding of up-armored heavy trucks after the Army confirmed its LTAS armoring strategy. They’re building on that record with their FMTV related risk-reduction investments, which include an internally-financed design for an LTAS-compatible FMTV cab.

If Oshkosh wins, production would mostly take place on the firm’s existing campus in Oshkosh, WI, with some sub-contracting to current subcontractors. That kind of concentration generally improves price and efficiency numbers, but lowers political leverage. The other potential political strike is the “industry consolidation” card, which notes the risks of placing all medium and heavy truck production (Army’s FMTV & FHTV, USMC’s MTVR & LVSR) with one supplier and, for the most part, one campus. Oshkosh’s response is to cite the number and range of large firms involved in the MRAP and JLTV programs, and to state their belief that there has been a fundamental industry change over the past few years. Oshkosh Defense release.

Additional Readings

• Global Security – FMTV

In February 2006 the Australian Government gave first pass approval for the replacement of the ADF’s current 105mm and 155mm artillery pieces with new, more capable, artillery systems that feature improved mobility, protection, range and accuracy. Current systems are all towed, and include the aged 105mm M2A2, the L119 Hamel 105mm Field Gun, and the M198 155mm Howitzer. Options for replacing them include a mix of self-propelled artillery systems and lightweight towed artillery systems under an A$ 450-600 million project known as LAND 17. The project will also examine advanced high precision munitions and a networked command and fire control system.

So, how does this project fit into Australia’s larger defense plans? What’s the expected program timeline? And who are the declared and potential contenders? That matters even more now that the solicitation has been released. DID covers the program, and a number of the confirmed or likely competitors… but one category has now been decided.

The LAND 17 Program

LAND 17 fits the combined arms group concept that forms part of the Hardened and Networked Army (HNA) initiative. It also fits with the requirements set out in Australia’s Defence 2000 White Paper, by supporting the ADF’s capacity to sustain a brigade deployed on operations for extended periods whilst maintaining at least a battalion group available for deployment elsewhere.

The Australian Department of Defence planned to release an open Request for Tender (RFT), to identify companies that can provide artillery systems with the level of capability sought. It was expected that the formal LAND 17 RFT would be released in late 2006, with in-service delivery anticipated between 2011-2013. The formal Phase 1 tender wasn’t released until September 2007, however, and the decision wasn’t made until October 2009.

Phase 2 was delayed, and eventually cancelled.

Both artillery types were to be complemented by Australia’s choice of a digital terminal control system. It would allow the tactical control of artillery, naval and close air support fires by forward observers and joint terminal attack controllers. This element of the project was supposed to be considered by Government in the second half of 2010, but the contract took until mid-2012.

Phase 1: The Towed Competition

LAND 17, Phase 1 involved a purchase of 155mm towed artillery pieces. The winner was BAE’s Ultra-Lightweight M777 Howitzer. It uses titanium parts to drive the weapon’s weight down to just 8,250 pounds (4.1 tons), about half the weight of Australia’s existing 155mm M198s. These towed howitzers can easily be airlifted by helicopters like Australia’s CH-47s, and are also qualified to fire the GPS-guided M982 Excalibur shell.

Titanium is a key Australian export, and Canada and the USA have used M777s successfully on the front lines in Afghanistan and Iraq. In July 2010, Australia added itself to the customer list, with a buy of 35. The guns entered service in July 2011, once the first 15 were delivered. Deliveries of the other 20 guns were expected to finish in February 2012, with Final Operating Capability scheduled for 2013.

Cancellation of Phase 1C will lead to another buy of 18 more M777s, bringing the expected total to 53 M777A2 guns. These guns are accompanied by Raytheon’s Advanced Field Artillery Tactical Data System (AFATDS), and the September 2011 release will be used for operator training and live-firing activities. Precision rounds will include Diehl/Rheinmetall’s SMArt 155 anti-tank rounds, and ATK’s screw-on XM1156 Precision Guidance Fuze kit for GPS-guided shells.

The Minister’s 2005 release noted that once in service, the new towed artillery pieces would be used to re-equip units based in Darwin, Townsville, Brisbane and the Combined Arms Training Centre in Puckapunyal, Victoria. This translates into:

• 8/12 Medium Regiment (M198 155mm, Palmerston near Darwin)
  
• 4 Field Regiment (L119 105mm, Townsville)
  
• 1 Field Regiment (L119 105mm, Enoggera Barracks near Brisbane)

Since all of the contenders are 155mm systems, the 8/12’s M198 howitzers will likely be devolved to other units. One scenario was that the 8/12 Medium Regiment’s M198 howitzers would transfer to reserve units. They would supply the single battery of 3 Field Regiment plus the two independent batteries of the former 6/13 Field Regiment, replacing their vintage M2A2 guns that predate the Vietnam War.

Under that scenario, all regular Australian Army units would become standardized on 155mm artillery. This would leave the reserve units of 7 Field Regiment and 23 Field Regiment in New South Wales operating the L119 Hamels, as the only remaining 105mm artillery in the ADF.

Phase 2: The Self-Propelled Competition (canceled)

LAND 17 Phase 2 involved a self-propelled artillery system, and the contenders break into 3 camps just like the global market. Australia’s Phase 2 competition was offered a choice of philosophies, therefore, in addition to a choice of vendors. The program was delayed, then cancelled entirely in May 2012.

In this category, traditional heavily armored tracked vehicles are being challenged by light mobile artillery, mounted on trucks. In between are a mix of wheeled and tracked choices: Soltam’s light tracked Rascal is C-130 portable, but Denel’s wheeled G6 would require a C-17, and so would KMW/GDLS’ wheeled Donar system with its truck-mounted Pzh-2000 turret.

Light mobile

Recent decades have seen the introduction of light truck-mounted 155mm systems such as Nexter’s Caesar and BAE’s Archer. They offer precision fire capability with more road mobility, and better air mobility via carriage in C-130 Hercules or other medium tactical transports.

BAE Bofors FH77-BW-L52 Archer is incorporated into a modified armored 6×6 articulated Volvo A30D truck chassis. It carries a remotely-controlled set of sensors and a machine gun for close-in defense, and the advanced electronics integrated into Archer grant it full compatibility with GPS-guided Excalibur rounds and full autonomy on the battlefield. It’s not air portable in Australia’s C-130Js, however, and will require C-17s for airlift. Thus far, the system has been ordered by Sweden and Norway.

The July 2005 teaming announcement involving BAE and Tenix was rendered moot when BAE bought Tenix, in 2008.

Nexter Ceasar 155mm wheeled self-propelled 155mm howitzer. Developed as a private venture by Giat Industries, the CAESAR system is based around a light 155mm/52 calibre howitzer, mounted on a 6×6 truck chassis fitted with an armored cab. Like the Archer system, it’s highly automated, and Caesar systems can be set into and out of action in less than one minute. Unlike Archer, it hasn’t yet been qualified with GPS-guided precision ammunition like the Raytheon/BAE Bofors GPS-guided M982 Excalibur shell. On the other hand, it can be transported in a C-130J aircraft, and is suitable for rapid deployment. Caesar has been sold to France and Thailand, and Saudi Arabia is interested.

In the French Army, Caesar is integrated with the Thales Land and Joint Systems Atlas artillery C4I (command, control, communications and intelligence) system. ADI (now Thales Australia) is Nexter’s partner, per the September 2004 teaming announcement

Heavy armored

At the other end of the spectrum, traditional heavy armor tracked designs also have a slew of modern options like the British AS90 Braveheart, Germany’s PzH-2000, South Korea’s K9, and the USA’s modernized M109A6 Paladin-PIM. They offer full off-road mobility that can keep up with armored units on any terrain, and provide high levels of protection.

KMW & Rheinmetall’s PzH-2000NL tracked self-propelled 155mm howitzer. These vehicles have been used with great effect by Dutch forces in southern Afghanistan, even fighting alongside Australian forces at times. The Dutch government has reportedly floated offers to sell about 30 of their systems, all of which are quite new; the PzH 2000 is also in service with Germany, Greece, and Italy.

Its chassis is based on the Leopard 2 main battle tank, and includes on-board ballistics computer; sensors that monitor items like muzzle temperature, velocity, etc.; automated ammunition selection and loading; and a GPS-based inertial navigation system designed to determine positional and survey data. At 55 tonnes (about 60.5 tons), the PzH-2000 requires C-17 transport into theater, and heavy truck tank transporters for lengthy overland moves.

South Korea’s K9 Thunder tracked self-propelled 155mm howitzer. Raytheon Australia teamed with South Korea’s Samsung Techwin to offer the K9 and its innovative protected K10 ammunition resupply vehicle (ARV), along with Raytheon’s AFATDS command and control (C2) system. Each K10 ARV supports 2 K9 guns, using a conveyor belt to transfer rounds and bagged charges into the bustle at the rear of the K9 turret at a rate of 48 rounds & charges in 18 minutes. It carries 104 rounds, sufficient to resupply both K9 guns.

The Raytheon Australian release adds that “In addition… we intend to offer… a Package D option for an upgrade for the in-service M198 155mm towed howitzer fleet to deliver reduced weight and a modern weapon management system (WMS)…”

The K9 & K10 are already in production for Korea and Turkey, with over 1,100 ordered thus far. It was also named by Forecast International as “the clear market leader” in its category through to 2015. A typical K9 battalion (or Regiment) would consist of 18 K9s, and 18 K10s for continuous and redundant re-supply. This makes for a total of 90 troops, compared with up to 216 required by Regiment of towed howitzers. The K9’s 56-ton weight would require a berth in one of Australia’s 4 C-17s if it wishes to be airlifted into theater, and heavy truck transports will be needed for lengthy overland moves.

Contracts & Key Events

June 3/12: DTCS Phase 1B buy. The Australian government announces that they’ve finally signed an A$ 63 million contract with Rockwell Collins Australia for 96 digital terminal control systems (DTCS), under Project Land 17 Phase 1B. It provides the ADF with control terminals, tactical full motion video systems, laser target designators and training, and in-service support.

Rockwell Collins provides more precision, characterizing it as an order for 152 systems that will be based on their FireStorm™ solution. Australia’s DTCS will include a tablet PC, a laser range finder, a laser target designator, a real-time video downlink receiver, a manpack radio, and the firm’s Defense Advanced GPS Receiver (DAGR).

Digital Terminal Control Systems allows Special Forces and artillery forward observers to identify targets with greater accuracy, using precision targeting software. Australian troops will use these systems to call on fire support from land, sea or airborne weapons, including the Army’s new M777 towed artillery. Australia DoD | Rockwell Collins.

June 2011: The June supplement [PDF] to Australia’s Defence Capability Plan highlights a change in LAND 17, Phase 1B:

“Indicative YOD and IOC bands deferred. Cost band reduced (from $100m-$300m to < $100m) with reduction of provision due to early investment in Operationally Urgent Requirement.”

Which is to say, the 2010 purchase of 56 digital terminal control systems (DTCS) for use by special forces and other troops in Afghanistan.

Oct 8/10: Australian Defence magazine reports on the LAND 17 Phase 2 self-propelled howitzer competition, and says it may never get underway:

“Rather than announcing a preferred bidder after what would seem to be a fairly exhaustive and longwinded evaluation phase since tenders closed in April 2008, Defence has arranged a further offer definition and refinement process (ODRP)… Now there are dark rumours that the SPH requirement will not be considered in the latter half of 2010… and that the requirement will be shelved until 2012 when it will again come up for consideration.”

The magazine believes that the government may decide not to move forward with Phase 2 at all, and declare that the M77A2 towed howitzer satisfies all of Australia’s 155mm artillery requirements.

Oct 20/09: Phase 1 win. Defence Minister John Faulkner announces that BAE Systems’ M777 has won the towed portion of Australia’s LAND 17 competition, whose total value is placed at A$ 493 million.

Phase 1 will provide the Army with 35 M777A2 guns, equipping 4 batteries of towed 155mm howitzers. An earlier DSCA request specified up to 57 systems, which allows Australia to order more guns later if it decides that’s necessary.

Phase 2 will pick an accompanying self-propelled artillery system. The competition could become quite interesting, as BAE has past partnerships involving the heavy PzH-2000, as well as its own truck-mounted Archer system. Nexter’s similar Ceasar truck-mounted system is also expected to compete, as is a Raytheon/Samsung K9/K10 entry that would compete with the tracked PzH-2000. The choices offer different philosophies, as well as different systems.

April 14/08: P2 response. Raytheon Australia delivers its LAND 17 Self Propelled Howitzer (SPH) Request for Tender (RFT) response to the Defence Materiel Organisation. Teamed with South Korea’s Samsung Techwin, Raytheon Australia’s solution includes the AS-9 (Samsung Techwin K9) and through life support. Source.

Oct 3/07: SMArt 155 shells. Australia’s DoD buys German SMArt 155 precision-guided anti-tank artillery shells, to replace the laser-guided Copperheads in its stocks. SMArt can be fired from any 155mm howitzer, so its selection will not influence the LAND 17 choice. See: “Get SMArt: Control for Aussie Artillery.”

Oct 1/07: Excalibur shells. Australia requests 250 M982 Excalibur GPS-guided shells, as part of a larger order. Excalibur is not an anti-tank round, unlike the SMArt 155 shells Australia recently purchased. Its accuracy can deliver precise counter-fire at enemy artillery and mortars, however, or target a particular building in an urban environment.

According to Raytheon, 3 levels of Excalibur integration are fielded or in development. All can be integrated on any howitzer and with components from potential host country (communications, command and control, GPS, fire control and other howitzer digitization equipment. Determining Excalibur’s compatibility with each 155 gun requires analysis of gun characteristics and test firings, but a brief look an numerous of the world’s 155 howitzers has not identified any insurmountable road block to Excalibur compatibility. Fire control integration onto platforms is “a fairly simple prospect,” and the accompanying PEFCS module is slightly bigger than a brief case. Determining Excalibur’s compatibility with each 155 gun requires analysis of gun characteristics and test firings, but “a brief look an numerous of the world’s 155 howitzers has not identified any insurmountable road block to Excalibur compatibility.”

Sept 27/07: Australia’s DoD releases LAND 17 solicitation documents. The systems to be acquired include protected self-propelled howitzers; lightweight towed airportable howitzers; and a digitised, networked battle management system. The battle management system includes the Advanced Field Artillery Tactical Data System for the command and control of joint fires, and digital terminal control systems for target acquisition. Australian DoD release.

May 7/07: P2 Teams. Raytheon Australia announces their core team for the Land 17 Artillery Replacement Program. Their “AS-9” proposal teams with South Korea’s Samsung Techwin to offer the K9 tracked self-propelled howitzer, and its fully automated K10 reloader vehicle.

March 20/07: P2 Teams. Krauss-Maffei Wegmann and BAE Systems Australia team for LAND 17. They will offer the PzH-2000 as the self-propelled solution. BAE Systems Australia adds their M777 ultra-lightweight towed howitzers to the partnership, for a combination towed/ self propelled solution.

Feb 22/06: Approval. The LAND 17 program receives first pass funding approval from the Australian government. DoD release.

Additional Readings & Sources

• Australian Defense Materiel Organization – Artillery Replacement 155mm Howitzer – LAND 17 Phase 1A
• Wikipedia – Royal Regiment of Australian Artillery
• Rockwell Collins – FireStorm™ Integrated Targeting System
• Australia Defence Magazine (September 2008) – Land 17’s shifting landscape. Reports that ST Kinetics’ Pegasus was ruled out on CH-47D transportability grounds, though Singapore uses it with those helicopters, and that the M777 is all alone in the lightweight towed howitzer category.
• Armed Forces Journal (October 2007) – The Case for Cannons. “In May, soldiers from the [US] Army’s 1st Battalion, 82nd Field Artillery Regiment, fired two XM982 Excalibur precision-guided, extended-range 155mm artillery rounds that consecutively penetrated the roof of a single house known to be a terrorist haven in the northern region of Baghdad…”
• Australia Defence Magazine (Dec 2006/ January 2007) – Defence Projects: Is Land 17’s C2 system in the bag? And is the choice of used PzH-2000’s likewise hardwired?
• Australian DSTO TR-1662 (April 2005) – An Application of Queues to Offensive Support Indirect Fire Weapons Systems
• Australian Defence Magazine (Nov-Dec 2004) – Hitting Harder: Future Army Firepower Assets
• Land Warfare Conference (January 2004) – Fitting Offensive Support for Network Centric Warfare? The Impacts of Alternative Organisational Structures

Announced Contenders

• Raytheon Australia (May 7/07) – LAND 17 Program. Their “AS-9” proposal teams with South Korea’s Samsung Techwin to offer the K9 tracked self-propelled howitzer, and its fully automated K10 reloader vehicle.
• Krauss-Maffei Wegman (March 20/07) – Krauss-Maffei Wegmann and BAE Systems Australia team for LAND 17. They will offer the PzH-2000. BAE Systems Australia adds their M777 ultra-lightweight howitzers to the partnership, for a combination towed/ self propelled solution.
• Army Technology – PzH 2000 155mm Self-Propelled Howitzer, Germany
• DID (March 28/05) – $834 Million for Ultra-Lightweight M777A1 Howitzers.
• DID (July 6/05) – Tenix and BAE Team Up for New Artillery Tender. The partner is BAE Systems Hagglunds, via BAE worldwide. The system is the truck-mounted Archer.
• Swedish FMV – Archer Artillery System 08
• BAE Systems – FH77 BW L52 – Archer and the towable FH77 B05 L52.
• GIAT Industries (Sept 28/04) – ADI Limited and Giat Industries team with CAESAR for land 17. Giat is now known as Nexter.
• Army Technology – Caesar 155mm – Self Propelled Artillery System

Potential Contenders

• DID (Oct 31/05) – Singapore Unveils new Air-Portable, Semi-Mobile 155mm Pegasus Howitzers. No word on whether they’ll enter it in LAND 17 – we’ll see once the requirements are out, but it is definitely a potential candidate. Pegasus uses an interesting concept that makes it air-portable using Australia’s CH-47 helicopters.
• The Israeli firm SOLTAM’s truck-mounted ATMOS 2000 System has been touted as a potential candidate in some circles. Its 20-ton tracked Rascal self-propelled system may also qualify, as it’s C-130 transportable. If not, a lighter truck mounted version of Rascal exists: the SPWH 2052.
• South Africa’s excellent G6 system cannot be ruled out, but at this stage, its search for an Australian partner is likely to be difficult. The wheeled self-propelled version would require a C-17 for transport.

In 2009, with its bridge buy of FMTV medium trucks in place, and initial awards for the potential JLTV Hummer replacement designs underway, the next order of business on the US Army’s agenda was a new Family of Heavy Tactical Vehicles multi-year contract: FHTV-III. That multi-billion dollar FHTV-III contract has been awarded – not as a re-compete like FMTV, but as a single-source solicitation.

Oshkosh has provided the core of this capability for over 20 yeas now. Its Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical Trucks (HEMTT) and their 13-ton payloads are the mainstay of the FHTV fleet, serving in variants that include M977/985 Cargo, M978 Fueler, M982/983 Tractors, and M984 Wrecker/Tow; they also serve as heavy transporters for Patriot and THAAD air defense systems. M1074/75 Palletized Load Systems (PLS) and PLS trailers (PLST) are best known for their automated container/pallet loading arms, and for their Universal Power Interface Kit (UPIK) that can add modules for firefighting, construction, cranes, cement mixing, etc. The M1000/1070 Heavy Equipment Transporters (HET) are flatbeds that can transport a 70-ton Abrams tank – or anything less – in order to save wear and tear on expensive armored vehicles and on the roads. A specialized FHTV truck called the M1977 CBT can even lay bridges. This article details the FHTV-III trucks, and related developments and contracts:

• FHTV: Upgrades, LTAS, and RECAP [updated]
  
• Contracts and Key Events [updated]
  
• Additional Readings
  

FHTV: Upgrades, LTAS, and RECAP

Most of the US Army’s HEMTT trucks are the A2 version; Oshkosh celebrated the delivery of the 20,000th HEMTT truck on Feb 14/08. The HEMTT A4 is the latest improvement to the line. HEMTT A4 will be produced in several models, including the the basic M997A4 cargo truck, M982A4 and M983A4 tractors for use as tractor-trailers, an M984A4 recovery truck fitted with cranes and winches, the M978A4 fuel servicing truck (tanker), and the M1120A4 load handling system variant, whose loading-assist arms & winch system is lighter than the M1074/75 PLS.

The hybrid drive HEMTT A3 variant is still in development. It claims to offer the same 13-ton cargo capacity and C-130 transportability, with a 20% improvement in fuel economy thanks to diesel-electric propulsion. Its configuration also gives the vehicle an on-board generator that can export 100 kW of military-grade power to power devices, weapons and sensors, or even a small remote installation. The A3’s electrical power potential was attractive to Raytheon’s Mobile Centurion prototype, for instance, which mounts a modified Phalanx radar-guided, electrically-driven 20mm gatling gun turret on the truck in order to shoot down incoming mortars, rockets, and artillery rounds.

The new HEMTT A4 production variants feature a 500 hp Caterpillar C-15 engine, an Allison 4500 SP/5-speed automatic transmission, rated for 600 hp, power-train upgrades to 1,750 pounds of torque, suspension upgrades, and major changes and additions to the cab. The HEMTT A4 shares common cab, parts, and support with the new palletized load system (PLS-A1) truck, reducing the need for separate spares. An improved climate control system that can handle tropical conditions is built into that cab, rather than requiring a retrofit as is the case for the HEMTT A2s.

A corresponding HEMTT A4 Light Equipment Transporter (LET) adds a special “hitch” for light trailers, etc.

For heavier hauling, the new HET A1 features numerous upgrades to the M1070 HET, including a 700-horsepower engine and an Allison 4800SP transmission, as well as better diagnostics, improved seats, higher capacity front suspension, standard air conditioning and an available 3rd door. HET trucks often use the M1000 heavy-duty trailer, as in the picture above.

Many of these upgrades actually revolve around the US Army’s Long Term Armor Strategy (LTAS). This LTAS-A armor can be augmented with a standardized, bolt-on LTAS-B kit for greater protection, and an integrated mounting allows fast installation of a protected gunner position (GPK) and machine-gun mount on the cab roof. HEMTT-A4 and their forthcoming companions the PLS-A1 and HET-A1 will come off the assembly line fitted with upgraded suspensions, the engine improvements noted above, different cab designs, and integral composite armor.

Oshkosh Defense’s director, Army Tactical Vehicle Programs Mike Ivy is quoted in AUSA’s April 2008 article as saying that Israeli firm Plasan Sasa played a large role on designing the FHTV LTAS-B armoring kit, but Finmeccanica’s DRS will be the main supplier for the program.

The Army’s new medium FMTV-A1P1 trucks that are currently produced by BAE Systems have their own LTAS-A and LTAS-B kits, extending the LTAS up-armoring approach across the US Army’s entire truck fleet.

LTAS-related changes aren’t the only updates under consideration. A J1939 databus gives the new HEMTT trucks the same kinds of capacity for self-diagnosis and automated troubleshooting that the FMTV medium truck fleet has used so effectively. C4ISR updates are also under consideration. Ivy:

“We are installing in one of our prototype trucks, located at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Md., a number of installation kits for the suite of C4ISR [command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance] systems that soldiers expect to see in vehicles today… That includes things like the Movement Tracking System, GPS, Battle Command System [DID: Blue force Tracker] the whole suite of systems that gives the soldier increased situational awareness. Although there is nothing inherent in the A4 for the Future Combat System-equipped brigade, it could easily be adapted to that, given the right installation kits.” The integration of the installation kits by Oshkosh will allow the Army to test a range of potential C4ISR capabilities for the new platforms.”

Some FHTV-III orders are defined as RECAP orders, however, and won’t be new build machines.

RECAP is part of the US Army’s planned sustainment triad of RESET, RECAP, and Replace. Recapitalization is depot-level maintenance activity that completely rebuilds the vehicles from the frame up, inspecting all parts and replacing worn items, while adding selected enhancements to benefit from more modern parts and technologies.

Under the HEMTT overhaul/ remanufacturing contract, for instance, Oshkosh integrates LED marker lights, two-piece wheels, engine and transmission upgrades, and air ride seats. Ancillary equipment such as cargo bodies, cranes, and fifth wheels are also overhauled and reassembled for use on the remanufactured vehicles. The tires and all electronics, such as wire harnesses, gauges, etc. are replaced with new. The vehicles are reassembled on the same integrated vehicle assembly line as a new truck, with a new “zero hours/zero miles” bumper-to-bumper warranty. All at significant savings over the cost of building a new vehicle.

Contracts and Key Events

All contracts are issued to Oshkosh Corp. in Oshkosh, WI, and managed by the U.S. Army’s Tank-automotive and Armaments Command (TACOM) in Warren, MI, unless the entry says otherwise.

May 24/18: New Orders Oshkosh Defense LLC. is being awarded two contract modifications by the US Army. The two deals valued at $182 million and $52 million respectively, provide for recapitalized Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical trucks, palletized load system (PLS) trucks, PLS trailers, and container transfer enhancement upgrade in the family of heavy tactical vehicles. Oshkosh is the main producer of the US Army’s fleet of Heavy Tactical Vehicles. Oshkosh has provided the core of this capability for over 20 yeas now. Its Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical Trucks (HEMTT) and their 13-ton payloads are the mainstay of the FHTV fleet, serving in variants that include M977/985 Cargo, M978 Fueler, M982/983 Tractors, and M984 Wrecker/Tow; they also serve as heavy transporters for Patriot and THAAD air defense systems. Work will be performed in Oshkosh, Wisconsin and is expected to be completed in the last quarter of 2019.

June 19/15: Oshkosh Defense was awarded a $780.4 million contract to recapitalize over 1,300 Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical Trucks, 435 palletized load systems (PLS) and over 1,000 new palletized load system trailers, as well as other equipment. The contract will run to 2022, with the multi-year contract incrementally funded.

July 20/11: Oshkosh Defense announces that they will recapitalize 160 FHTV trucks to HEMTT A4 and PLS A1 standards, under a “more than $50 million” order from the U.S. Army. Work is expected to begin in March 2012, and end in September 2012.

June 9/11: Oshkosh announces an award for “more than 730” FHTV trucks, including new and recapitalized HEMTT A4s and new HET A1s.

Production of the new HEMTT A4s and HETs on these awards is expected to begin in April 2012, and be complete in September 2012. Recapitalization of the HEMTT A4s began in May 2011, and is scheduled to be completed in September 2012. Together, these orders have a value of “more than $252 million.”

Jan 19/11: A $22.6 million firm-fixed-price contract for 301 HEMMT LRAS B-Kit Armor Sets. Work will be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of June 30/11. One bid was solicited with one bid received (W56HZV-09-D-0024).

Dec 23/10: A $21.4 million firm-fixed-price contract for 368 M1076 PLS trailers. Work will be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of Sept 30/11. One bid was solicited with one bid received (W56HZV-09-D-0024).

Dec 6/10: Oshkosh Defense and the U.S. Army commemorate the rollout of the 1st production FHTV HET A1 and Palletized Load System A1 heavy trucks. Oshkosh release.

Oct 13/10: A $389.6 million firm-fixed-price contract for 1,054 “new palletized load systems trucks M983A2 LETs,” under the FHTV-III contract. Work is to be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of Sept 30/12. One bid was solicited with one bid received by TACOM in Warren, MI (W56HZV-09-D-0024).

Subsequent queries to Oshkosh Defense reveal that this order is not for PLS or HET trucks, but represents the initial HET A1 contract they discussed on Oct 6/10. In other words, the Pentagon release is mistaken and misleading.

Oct 6/10: Oshkosh Defense announces a $440 million contract for over 1,000 HET A1 trucks – the 1st production order for the new HET A1 configuration. Production will take place in Oshkosh, WI, and is scheduled for completion in June 2012.

Oct 4/10: A $70 million requirements contract for 139 new HEMTT M984A4 wreckers, and 7 new HEMTT M983A4 LET trucks. Work is to be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of Sept 30/11. One bid was solicited with one bid received (W56HZV-09-D-0024).

June 30/10: Oshkosh announces 2 delivery orders from the U.S. Army TACOM Life Cycle Management Command (LCMC) worth over $600 million. Order #1 is worth $584.9 million, and extends production for 1,726 new and recapitalized severe-duty HEMTT A4 vehicles (1,274 new, 452 refurbished), and 98 Palletized Load System (PLS) trailers; it was announced by the Pentagon on July 2/10. The second award was announced by the Pentagon on June 16/10, and is noted below.

HEMTT deliveries will begin in July 2010, and continue through September 2011. PLS A1 trailer production will start in June 2011, and continue through October 2011 (W56HZV-09-D-0024).

June 16/10: A $24.3 million firm-fixed-price contract for 439 palletized load system trailers. The M1074/75 PLS has a high-capacity automated loader for heavy gear Work is to be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of Sept 30/12 (W56HZV-09-D-0024).

June 15/10: A $6.1 million firm-fixed-price contract adds 5 HEMTT M984 A4 wreckers without their winch, but with Carwell rustproofing. Another 15 HEMTT M983 A4 tractors would have both a winch and Carwell rustproofing. Work will be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of Jan 31/11 (W56HZV-09-D-0024).

June 11/10: A $34.8 million requirements delivery order contractor 90 RECAP “M11220 A4” and 50 RECAP M977 HEMTT A4 cargo trucks, with associated boxed engines and the ability to order missing parts as required. The first designation is actually a typo, and should refer to M1120 A4 HEMMT Load Handling System trucks, with an automated loader for heavy gear.

Work is to be performed in Oshkosh, WI with an estimated completion date of June 30/11. One bid was solicited with one bid received (W56HZ-09-D-0024). See also Oshkosh Defense.

June 8/10: A $138.8 million firm-fixed-price contract, adding additional vehicle variants and accompanying US Federal Reserve excise tax for those vehicles to the FHTV-III contract. The tax is related to vehicle weight, and applies to trucks used in the USA; it’s 100% pass-through, where one branch of government pays another.

The vehicles in question are 481 HEMTT M983A4 light equipment transporters, and 1 HEMTT M1120A4 load handling system. Work is to be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of Sept 30/11. One bid was solicited with one bid received (W56HZV-09-D-0024).

May 7/10: A $6 million firm-fixed-price contract for 25 Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical Truck (HEMTT) M983A2 light equipment transporter trucks. Note that these are the A2 version, not the A4 version; but they are on the FHTV-III contract (W56HZV-09-D-0024). Work is to be performed in Oshkosh, Wis., with an estimated completion date of Sept 30/12. See also Oshkosh Defense release.

May 3/10: Oshkosh Defense announces 2 contracts.

The first $8 million contract will supply more than 90 HEMTT A4 “B-kits” for additional armor, over and above factory-installed “A-kit” armor. The B-kits can be installed in-theater, and delivery is expected to be complete by September 2010.

A second award valued at more than $5 million will apply self-sealant coating to more than 300 new and recapitalized M978 A4 Tankers, continuing work that began in December 2009 and extending it to September 2010. The coating seals punctures from small-arms fire or other small, high-velocity objects – which sounds like a pretty good idea if you’re driving a truck loaded with diesel fuel.

April 20/10: Oshkosh Defense announces a US Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) award worth more than $6 million to supply 600 axles for the HEMTT A4. Production is expected to begin in October 2010 and be complete by January 2011.

March 18/10: Oshkosh Defense announces an $11.4 million delivery order for “more than 40” next-generation HEMTT A4 heavy trucks to the United Arab Emirates. The HEMTT variants included in this contract are the Patriot tractor, wrecker and guided missile transporter.

The vehicles will be built and delivered July through September 2011, and the order was issued under the FHTV-III) contract to take advantage of volume pricing.

Feb 22/10: A $13 million delivery order to supply more than 35 HEMTT A4 trucks to the US Army Reserve. The variants include M984A4 wreckers and M1120A4 load handling systems. Production is expected to begin in September 2010 and be complete in June 2011.

Feb 11/10: Oshkosh Defense announces a $5 million delivery order for “more than 15” HEMTT A4 trucks. Vehicles include M985A4 guided missile transporters (GMT) that deliver missile 4-packs to THAAD launchers using an integrated crane, M977A4 electrical power plant (EPP) trucks , and large repair parts transporter (LRPT) cargo trucks. Production is expected to begin in July 2010 and be complete in September 2010.

Feb 5/10: DRS Sustainment Systems, Inc. in St. Louis, MO receives a $93.7 million firm-fixed-price delivery order for 275 HET M1000 trailers. Work is to be performed in St. Louis, MO, with an estimated completion date of May 30/12. One bid was solicited with one bid received (W56HZV-09-D-0107 #0002). See also DRS release.

Feb 1/10: The US DoD releases its FY 2011 budget request. It includes a total of $741.9 million for the FHTV-III program, split $553.2 million in the regular defense budget, $188.7 in “OCO” supplemental funding buys, and $3.5 million for Research, Development, Testing & Evaluation. The request must pass through Congress and be approved before it translates into actual appropriations.

Jan 28/10: Oshkosh announces a $21+ million delivery order under FHTV-III, to produce more than 60 recapitalized M984 HEMTT A4 wrecker trucks, plus components and engines.

Production is expected to begin in January 2011, and be complete in April 2011. The heavily used vehicles are returned to Oshkosh, stripped to their frame rails, completely rebuilt to like-new condition, and upgraded to the new A4 configuration.

Jan 21/10: Oshkosh announces 4 awards from the US Defense Logistics Agency, valued at $89 million, for its M-ATV MRAPs and FHTV trucks.

When asked, Oshkosh representatives break out the contracts, explaining that the contract for 2,400 HEMTT A2 and A4 axle assemblies is worth over $25 million, and the contract for “more than” 430 HET engines is worth over $13 million. Work under these orders is expected to be complete by December 2010.

Jan 6/09: Oshkosh Defense and Boeing announce that the HEMTT A4 has been selected as the platform for the U.S. Army’s High Energy Laser Technology Demonstrator (HEL TD) program. Boeing officials received the HEMTT A4 in December 2009 , and integration of the HEL TD system will begin in spring 2010 at Boeing’s Huntsville, AL facility.

With its critical design review complete, Boeing will now attempt to build a rugged beam control system on the widely used truck. The beam control system includes mirrors, high-speed processors and high-speed optical sensors for the electrically powered, solid state laser. The system must acquire, track, and select an aimpoint while the system receives the laser beam from the laser device, them reshape and align the beam, and focus it on the target.

Boeing completed a vehicle trade study for HEL TD, and identified the HEMTT A4 as the best solution for this demonstrator phase. Boeing representatives added that the hybrid drive HEMTT A3 is a viable candidate for the future objective system if it’s fielded, and that its extra onboard power capacity would be seen as a plus. Boeing release | Oshkosh release.

Dec 29/09: A $258.4 million firm-fixed-price contract for 728 new M1075 Palletized Load System (PLS) trucks (W56HZV-09-D-0024). Work is to be performed in Oshkosh, Wis., with an estimated completion date of Sept 30/12.

Dec 29/09: A $31.9 million firm-fixed-price requirements contract to change another 728 M1075 PLS trucks from the A0 configuration to the A1 configuration. Work is to be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of Sept 30/12.

As noted above, the PLS A1 is the most current design, with a Long Term Armor Strategy (LTAS)-compliant cab, a 600-hp engine, the Oshkosh-patented TAK-4® independent front suspension, and a demountable flatrack cargo bed with 16.5-ton payload capacity. See also Oshkosh release.

Dec 29/09: Oshkosh received a $31.75 million firm-fixed-price requirements contract for the purchase of 110 new M977 HEMTT A4 trucks under the existing FHTV-III contract (W56HZV-09-D-0024). Work is to be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of Sept 30/12.

Dec 18/09: Oshkosh Defense announces a $56 million delivery order from US Army TACOM LCMC, to supply the Army with the first set of 207 M983 HEMTT A4 Light Equipment Transporters (LET). The LETs have a special “hitch” for trailers, etc., and already serve in the HEMTT A2 configuration. These are the first A4 configuration vehicles for this model.

Unusually, the Oshkosh announcement precedes the Pentagon’s Dec 29/09 announcement of this $56.4 million firm-fixed-price requirements contract. Work is to be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated contract completion date of Sept 30/12. Production and delivery is expected to be complete in September 2010. The award brings the U.S. Army’s total Family of Heavy Tactical Vehicles (FHTV) contract to more than $3.2 billion, under the FHTV-III contract (W56HZV-09-D-0024).

Dec 16/09: Oshkosh Defense announces an order valued at more than $63 million from the U.S. Army TACOM LCMC, to supply more than 1,150 Palletized Load System (PLS) trailers. The trailers feature a removable cargo bed (flatrack) with a 16.5-ton payload capacity. Production is expected to be complete in June 2011.

Oct 21/09: Oshkosh Defense announces a $35 million contract modification from for 102 HEMTT A4 heavy trucks, on behalf of the US Army’s National Guard units. The vehicles will include HEMTT M985A4 cargo truck and M1120A4 load handling system models, and will be delivered by March 2010.

Sept 29/09: Oshkosh announces an $801 million delivery order from the U.S. Army TACOM LCMC for more than 1,190 new next-generation HEMTT A4s, more than 180 new HEMTT A2s and more than 80 Palletized Load System Trailers for the U.S. Army. Oshkosh also will deliver more than 1,020 recapitalized HEMTT A4s. Total: over 2,470 new and recapitalized HEMTT and PLST trucks. Work is expected to be complete by May 2011.

Sept 8/09: Oshkosh Defense received a delivery order worth more than $23 million from TACOM LCMC for 45 HEMTT M984 A4s wreckers. Production will begin in March 2010 and is expected to be completed by May 2010.

The Oshkosh HEMTT M984 A4 wrecker is a heavy duty tow truck equipped with a crane and winches to recover disabled vehicles. The wrecker can tow disabled vehicles as well as perform vehicle maintenance in severe off-road conditions.

July 7/09: Oshkosh Defense announces a $9.4 million contract modification from TACOM Life Cycle Management Command to begin durability and performance testing of the new Heavy Equipment Transporter (HET) A1 model. Testing will take place at Yuma Proving Ground, AZ.

Once testing is completed, full-rate production of the Oshkosh HET A1 is scheduled for early 2010.

June 18/09: Oshkosh Corp. in Oshkosh, WI received a maximum $31.1 million firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract for HEMTT engines, on behalf of the US Army.

There was originally one proposal solicited with one response, and contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year on Sept 30/09. The contract itself will run until June 19/12, managed by the Defense Logistics Agency Warren (DSCC-ZG) in Warren, MI (SPRDL1-09-D-0025).

June 15/09: Oshkosh Defense announces a $38+ million delivery order for more than 100 new HEMTT M978A4 fuel tanker and M985A4 cargo trucks, on behalf of the U.S. Army National Guard. The U.S. Army Tank-automotive and Armaments Command (TACOM) Life Cycle Management Command (LCMC) will be managing this order.

May 21/09: DRS Sustainment Systems received a $103.9 million firm-fixed-price contract for 274 M1000 heavy equipment transporter semitrailers. DRS Sustainment will perform the work at its facility in Saint Louis, MO, with an estimated completion date of May 30/12. One bid was solicited and received by TACOM-Warren, AMSCC-TAC-ATBC, in Warren, MI (W56HZV-09-D-0107).

The M1000 semitrailer [PDF] carries armored vehicles and other heavy equipment loads weighing up to 80 tons. The M1000 is able to load, unload, and transport the M1 Abrams tank and other heavy equipment on-road, off-road and cross country, in all weather conditions.

May 21/09: Oshkosh Defense announces a delivery order with the U.S. Army Tank-automotive and Armaments Command Life Cycle Management Command (TACOM LCMC) for more HEMTT trucks and trailers. The delivery order, valued at more than $28 million, includes M1120A4 Load Handling System (LHS) and M978A4 fuel tanker trucks.

The US Army Reserve will receive more than 70 HEMTT A4s, and more than 30 Palletized Load System Trailers (PLST) with an automated loading arm. The US Marine Corps will receive 30 PLSTs, which will be integrated with their Oshkosh LVSR heavy trucks.

May 20/09: Oshkosh Defense announces a $40 million delivery order for “more than 130” HEMTT A4 trucks. Most will be new-build, but 3 vehicles will be RECAP.

April 20/09: A maximum $8.3 million firm-fixed-price, 5-year contract, covering transfer cases with containers for the Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical Truck (HEMTT).

This was originally a sole source competition, and the date of performance completion is April 20/14. TheDefense Logistics Agency in Warren, MI manages this contract (SPRDL1-09-D-0007).

Feb 25/09: Oshkosh Defense announces a $477 million delivery order calls for more than 1,350 HEMTT A4s (750 new, 600 RECAP) and more than 1,000 of the Palletized Load System Trailers (PLST) that help with loading and unloading.

This latest order pushes the total value of the FHTV-III contract so far to more than $2.1 billion.

Feb 25/09: Oshkosh Defense unveils its new HET A1 variant at the Association of the United States Army (AUSA) Winter Symposium and Exposition in Fort Lauderdale, FL.

Dec 31/08: Oshkosh Corp. in Oshkosh, WI received a maximum $1.121 billion firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery, sole source contract for heavy and medium tactical truck support, if all 9 option years in this 10-year contract are exercised. Under the contract, Oshkosh Defense will supply the DLA with replacement parts to support Oshkosh’s medium and heavy tactical vehicles, which include the US Marines’ Medium Tactical Vehicle Replacement (MTVR) truck, and the Army’s FHTV Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical Trucks (HEMTT) and Palletized Load Systems (PLS). Oshkosh also supplies replacement parts for other manufacturers’ medium and heavy-payload vehicles.

The first contract order is valued at $17.5 million and is for approximately 2,300 replacement part numbers to support Oshkosh’s tactical vehicles.

This follows the previous 8 year contract, which was structured as a one-year contract with 7 option years, each of which were exercised, that ended in December 2008. There were originally 2 proposals solicited, but only one response. The contract’s base year will end on Dec 31/09, but options could continue this agreement to 2018. The US Defense Logistics Agency’s Defense Supply Center Columbus (DSCC) in Columbus, OH (SPM7LX-09-D-9008) manages these contracts. See also: Oshkosh Defense release.

Dec 22/08: Oshkosh Defense announces a $5 million contract modification to RECAP approximately 30 M1977 Common Bridge Transporters (CBT). Under the modification, Oshkosh Defense will tear down the 10-year-old HEMTT A0-derived CBTs, and upgrade them to HEMTT A2 Load Handling System (LHS) equivalents with computer-controlled engines and transmission systems, as well as a lighter load handling system.

Dec 15/08: Oshkosh Defense announces a $9.4 million contract modification with the U.S. Army Tank-automotive and Armaments Command (TACOM) for continuing research and development of their diesel-electric drive HEMTT A3 variant.

The contract modification will fund additional improvements to the current HEMTT A3 technology demonstrator, by upgrading the vehicle’s engine horsepower and incorporating the U.S. Army’s LTAS armoring strategy. Under this contract, the firm will end up delivering 2 new HEMTT A3 vehicles. One will be provided to the U.S. Army for a 20,000-mile durability test at its Aberdeen Test Center. The 2nd vehicle will be benchmarked for performance against the current HEMTT A2/A4 production vehicles.

Oshkosh Defense President John Stoddart described this contract as: “…among the first steps that could establish the HEMTT A3 as the Army’s next-generation support vehicle.” Time will tell.

Nov 26/08: Oshkosh Defense announces a $51 million contract with the for more than 660 LTAS-B up-armoring kits for HEMTT A4 trucks. The $51 million contract includes a recent $15 million armor kit contract modification.

The LTAS-A kit is armoring installed at the factory, and delivered with the trucks. The LTAS-B kit is the add-on armor which the HEMTT A4 has been designed from the outset to carry, if necessary. It can be installed by a 2-soldier crew with no special tools, other than the required lifting devices to get the pieces into position.

Since Oshkosh’s Palletized Load System (PLS) A1 trucks will share a common cab with the HEMTT A4 , they will also be able to use these armor kits when they are fielded.

Nov 4/08: Oshkosh Corp. in Oshkosh, WI received the new FHTV-III multi-year contract, which will add more than 6,000 upgraded vehicles to the U.S. Army’s FHTV fleet.

The initial delivery order is a $1.267 billion requirements contract firm-fixed-price contract to buy 2,285 new HEMTT-A4 trucks, 768 HEMTT RECAP trucks, and to upgrade a lower model truck. Work will be performed in Oshkosh, WI with deliveries expected to begin in November 2008 and an estimated completion date of Sept 30/12. One bid was solicited and one bid was received by TACOM in Warren, MI (W56HZV-09-D-0024).

A series of orders that were issued in February and March 2008 raised initial HEMTT A4 orders to 1,745 new and 292 RECAP trucks, with production slated to begin in July 2008. The initial delivery order under FHTV-III will more than double this total. See also Oshkosh release | Defense Update

Additional Readings

• Global Security – Family of Heavy Tactical Vehicles (FHTV)
• Oshkosh Defense – HEMTT A4
• Association of the United States Army (April 2008) – Soldier Armed: HEMTT A4
• Oshkosh Defense – HEMTT A3. With a diesel-electric ProPulse drive.
• Oshkosh Defense – HET. For transporting tanks etc.
• Oshkosh Defense – PLS. Palletized Load System for containers and related cargo.
• Boeing (Aug /10) – A new ‘light’ truck. Discusses the High Energy Laser Technology Demonstrator (HEL TD), which will be mounted on a HEMTT A4.
• US Army (July 15/09) – PLS vehicle: Backbone of distribution
• O’Neill & Associates – Case Study, Oshkosh FHTV. The firm worked to produce the trucks’ interactive technical manuals.

Germany has always been known for producing excellent armored vehicles. A combination of features that arguably make it the world’s best tank, and fire sale prices stemming from Germany’s rapid disarmament, have made the Leopard 2 the standard main battle tank in Europe and beyond. The same level of innovation and execution was shown in the late 1960s, when Germany’s Marder became the west’s first Infantry Fighting Vehicle (IFV). Designs like the American M2/M3 Bradley, Sweden’s CV90 family and new SEP, Singapore’s Bionix-II, and Korea’s new XK-21 have stepped far beyond that legacy, however, and even the Russian region has continued to update their BMP designs. Meanwhile, the nature of military operations has changed to emphasize modularity, out of country missions, advanced electronic communications, and strong protection against threats like land mines.

The Marders need to be replaced, and this became a priority even within Germany’s limited defense budget. In response, German armored vehicle leaders Rheinmetall & KMW formed a 50/50 joint venture to design and produce a solution that would address these issues, and return Germany to a leadership position in the tracked IFV field. Enter the new Puma IFV – which has just received a EUR 3 billion production order from Germany.

Puma IFV: Platform & Features

The Puma carries a crew of 3, plus 6 fully-equipped troops and its weapons array. PSM’s design goals for the Puma were simple to state, but difficult to execute:

Optimum protection against any type of threat for maximum survivability of the crew. The Puma features two different levels of protection. The basic ‘Class A’ configuration is qualified in accordance with STANAG 4569. It provides protection against RPG-7 rockets and armor-piercing rounds under 25mm in the frontal arc, and artillery shell fragments and 7.62mm weapons all around. PSM won’t discuss mine-protection techniques, but say that the Puma has full mine protection in its Class A configuration per STANAG 4569 against heavy anti tank mines. As a comparison, PSM states that the Puma’s inherent mine protection is much higher than that of KMW’s Dingo 2 mine-resistant vehicles.

The exhaust is cooled before release to minimize infrared signature, and the company claims that the rear ramp can double as a 2-man fighting station when partly closed. Unlike Israel’s Merkava tanks, however, there is no sniper port in the rear door. The usual array of automatic fire extinguishers, NBC (nuclear, biological, chemical) overpressure protection, etc. defends against unconventional threats.

These IFVs can be quickly reconfigured for higher intensity combat by adding separately transported modular armor made of “steel and non-steel elements,” which raises the protection level up to ‘Class C’. The vehicle retains the same anti-mine protection as Class A, but now has strong protection on the sides that will defeat RPG-7 rockets, medium-caliber weapons fire up to 25mm, and Explosively Formed Projectile (EFP) mines. Explosive reactive armor can be added on request, and so can active protection systems (APS) that fire rockets or shockwaves to defeat incoming missiles or tank shells. The EADS/KMW/Buck MUSS APS is already integrated, and others can be added or substituted on request.

Special roof armor elements in Class C can provide protection the crew from air or artillery delivered bomblets, though they will not protect against an explosively formed projectile fired through the top, like Germany’s popular GIWS SMArt shells.

Optimum armament for escalation and de-escalation in all missions. The Puma has a remote-controlled turret that carries a 30mm MK30-2 ABM stabilized cannon with a 3 km/ 1.8 mil range for fire on the move, elevation from -10 to +45 degrees, and a coaxial 5.56mm MG4 machine gun. The fire control system reaches beyond armored vehicles, and can handle slow-moving aerial targets like helicopters and UAVs.

The remote control turret allows a unified crew compartment, without a turret basket that holds the commander and gunner. The vehicle carries 200 main rounds ready and another 200 in storage, and the dual-feed system allows the gunner to switch seamlessly between APFSDS-T armor piercing rounds and KETF submunition/fragmentation rounds with programmable fuzes. Grenade dispensers are mounted behind the turret for smoke etc.

At present, other commercial remotely-operated small-medium caliber weapon systems have not been integrated with the Puma’s remote-controlled main turret. That’s scheduled to be part of a 2nd stage vehicle upgrade program a few years after acceptance in 2014, along with anti-tank missiles that would bring Puma to parity with American Bradley IFVs, Russia’s BMP… and even the Marder IFVs Puma will replace.

Rapid, strategic, global deployability and high tactical mobility. A highly compact 890 series 10-cylinder, 800kW (1,080 hp) diesel engine from Tognum AG subsidiary MTU Friedrichshafen includes a new starter generator developed jointly with the company ESW, and a new transmission from Renk. If the Puma met its weight targets, that engine would offer a specific power-to-weight ratio of 20-25 kW/t, and can drive the Puma at up to 70 km/h/ 42 mph. Reports indicate that the final vehicle is overweight, which would push those performance figures down.

The Puma has 450 mm/ 18 inches of ground clearance despite its mine protection, and aims at an unrefueled range of 600 km/ 360 miles when equipped with full Class C protection. Decoupled running gear with hydro-pneumatic elements offers maneuverability and a smoother ride.

Deployability offers different challenges. The USA has spent billions in a fruitless quest to create survivable vehicles under 20 tons that can fit into a C-130, but Germany set a more realistic goal. The Puma’s Gross Vehicle Weight (max. recommended weight) is 43t/ 47.4 tons.

In its basic Class A configuration, Germany wanted a 31.45t/ 34.667-ton vehicle that can be airlifted in the Airbus A400M; indeed, the ability to carry the Puma is a firm requirement for Germany’s continued participation in the A400M program. If the A400M can meet this specification, the vehicle’s protection will be adequate for any landing strip secure enough to land the aircraft.

Add-on armor modules that improve the Puma’s protection to Class C raise its weight to a target of 41t/ 45.2 tons. A flight of 5 A400Ms could transport 5 Class A vehicles; alternatively, they could carry 4 Class A vehicles, 4 sets of Class C protection modules, and some additional equipment.

Network centric warfare capability. The Puma’s benefits from Germany’s world-renowned optronics industry, and uses the Leopard tank’s “hunter-killer” system that lets the gunner and commander acquire targets separately, and then automatically slews the turret to the designated victim upon handover. The hunter killer system is based on fiber glass optical transmission, and PUMA’s electrical architecture uses an “Open-Can-Bus-System” modular design with CPUs and I/O modules designed to be replaceable for future upgrades.

The vehicle will be compatible with Germany’s FuInfoSys battlefield C2 system, and its IdZ future infantryman setup, while IFF(identification, friend or foe) systems assist with combat identification.

A 170kW flywheel generator supplies power for the Puma’s various electrical systems, and the vehicle has enough battery capacity for temporary engine shut down. Long overwatch roles using its advanced sensors and communications will force the crew to run the engine in idle mode, however, in order to maintain power. PSM could not break through that limitation, but they strove to ensure low noise and fuel consumption when this option is used.

On the training side, PSM does offer a simulator and consoles, but embedded training also ensures that the Puma functions as its own simulator when requested. Maintenance functions have their own simulation packages.

Sustainability under extreme climatic conditions and inadequate infrastructural conditions. Recent operations have emphasized the importance of good air conditioning in vehicles; it’s hard to function when temperatures hit 50C/140F inside. Onboard BITE (Built in Test Equipment) “prognostics” monitor vehicle systems, and can warn of problems before they show up as system failures.

Beyond BITE, interactive electronic technical documentation is available with advice for troubleshooting, maintenance, and repairs. So is a parts catalog that includes options for Mission Support Kits of specific spares and consumables, together with special tool kits. This is the German definition of “sustainability under inadequate infrastructural conditions,” after all, not the Russian one.

Puma IFV: Project and Industrial Organization

The Bundestag set the project in motion in September 2002 when it awarded a development contract for the new IFV. To address this need, German armored vehicle leaders Rheinmetall & KMW formed a 50/50 joint venture called Projekt System & Management GmbH in 2002. Typically, their goal was to produce the world’s best IFV, with a range of features that would give it an unmatched ability to cope with current and future threats.

The initial development contract was followed by a 2004 order for 5 pre-series vehicles and related services, which are currently undergoing intensive trials, and by a November 2007 production order. Both Krauss-Maffei Wegmann and Rheinmetall hailed the production decision as “a crucial step in reequipping the German Army for the future as well as being vitally important to the German defence industry and a whole host of medium-sized subcontractors.”

PSM would not elaborate on the exact list, but said that over 50 subcontractors were involved. The first serially produced PUMA are scheduled to enter service in 2010.

Overall, PSM has certainly produced Germany’s next IFV, creating a top-of-the line vehicle in its class. The translation into market leadership may prove more perilous. In order to find customers beyond their home country, PSM’s Puma must compete with advanced, versatile tracked competitors like BAE’s popular CV90 and its variants, Russia’s BMP-3, and South Korea’s amphibious K-21 NIFV. It must also compete with the lighter wheeled APCs that have become so popular in Europe, despite their terrain limitations. The German order for 350 vehicles will give the Puma a strong base, but European buys of competing vehicles to date, Asian competitors, America’s “not invented here” approach to major weapons, and Germany’s restrictive export policies are likely to make export sales challenging.

Puma IFV: Contracts & Key Events

2018

June 8/18: Severe delays The German Bundesrechnungshof, an agency comparable to the US Government Accountability Office is warning that the federal procurement of the new Puma infantry fighting vehicle will take years longer than previously thought. The Puma is jointly developed in a joint venture between Kraus-Maffei Wegmann and Rheinmetall. Rheinmetall is responsible for the development and design of the chassis. The vehicle is operated by a crew of three and carries up to eight equipped troops in the rear troop compartment. The vehicle is of modular construction which allows it to be fully air transportable on an A400M aircraft. The Puma is armed with a remotely controlled weapon station, developed by Kraus-Maffei Wegmann, which is fitted with a dual feed Mauser 30mm MK 30-2 cannon. Rheinmetall is responsible for the integration of the Mauser cannon and the ammunition handling system. At the current rate the integration of all required features into the platform will take until 2029, meaning that German ground forces will have to rely on the predecessor tank, the 40-some-year-old Marder. Preparations for sustaining the Marder beyond its envisioned end of life in 2025 are already underway, including retrofitting the vehicles with the MELLS anti-tank weapon.

2015

July 28/15: The German Army has officially received its Puma Infantry Fighting Vehicles (IFV) from Rheinmetall and Krauss-Maffei Wegmann, following the fleet’s approval [German] in May, along with a delivery of seven vehicles as a training contingent. The German BWB procurement agency placed an order for 405 of the vehicles in July 2009 to replace the Bundeswehr’s fleet of Marder IFVs, subsequently revising the number down to 350 in July 2012. The full force of Puma vehicles is expected to be completed by 2020, with batches currently being received and passed to units for training before returning to home bases.

May 8/15: The German Army has approved [German] the Puma Infantry Fighting Vehicle for service, with seven vehicles forming an initial training contingent. The Puma will replace the current in-service Marder IFV, with the Germans placing an order for 405 Pumas in July 2009.

June 12/14: Heat Trials. Rheinmetall announces that its Puma has successfully completed firing and mobility trials in the UAE, in temperatures that ranged between 35-50C in the shade. The MK30-2/ABM automatic 30mm cannon and the MG4 7.62 machine gun both performed well in stationary and moving firing trials, the air conditioning system held up well and efficiently, and mobility trials went well in sand dunes, steep loose-surface tracks, and a rocky desert streambed.

With the completion of cold and hot-weather trials, the IFV is about ready for acceptance. Sources: Rheinmetall, “Puma stands up to heat and sand”.

Sept 17/13: Testing. German media report that testing at Germany’s Wehrteknik Dienstelle (WTD) testing center in Triel has revealed a number of design problems hampering the Puma IFV. Meanwhile, the program’s total estimated cost has risen to EUR 4.3 billion, which is a 39%/ EUR 1.2 billion jump beyond initial program figures.

Changes to the chassis have reportedly been required, with the number of wheel pairs raised from 5 to 6, and engine improvements have been necessary. Weight is reportedly an issue. Electronics are cited as inadequate to achieve the desired performance standards, and even weapon accuracy is questioned.

Meanwhile, German troops must continue using the Marder, which has limitations when fighting at night, and in counter-insurgency missions like Afghanistan where precise target identification is required. Sources: Volksfreund, “Ein Puma mit vielen Problemen” and “Bundeswehr-Panzer Puma wird 1,2 Milliarden Euro teurer”.

June 25/13: Upgrades. Germany will spend another EUR 500 million to develop the Puma after it finishes current trials, with most of these funds spent after 2017. Enhancements will reportedly include electronics upgrades, a remotely-operated machine gun station up top, and provision for anti-tank missiles.

The weapons upgrade will bring Puma to par with new unmanned IFV turrets, and with tracked IFV competitors like American Bradley and Russian BMP. Even the Marder IFVs Puma will replace can carry MBDA’s Milan anti-tank missiles. Sources: RP Online, “Schützenpanzer Puma soll aufgerüstet werden”.

Aug 18/11: USA. The U.S. Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI issues awards to 2 of 3 Ground Combat Vehicle bidders. BAE Systems and General Dynamics each win over $400 million in Technology Development Phase contracts, but the SAIC/KMW “Team Full Spectrum” bid, based on Germany’s highly-regarded Puma IFV, does not go forward. US Army.

Jan 21/11: USA. SAIC’s “Team Full Spectrum” for the US Ground Combat Vehicle IFV submits a Puma-derived design, again, in response to the renewed November 2010 solicitation. Boeing, Krauss-Maffei Wegmann and Rheinmetall Defence will be subcontractors. Boeing.

Dec 6/10: Testing. Rheinmetall and KMW hand over the first 2 Puma infantry fighting vehicles, on time, to the German BWB in Kassel for verification tests. This marks the first deliveries under the 405-vehicles contract for the German Armed Forces. Rheinmetall.

May 24/10: USA. Future Combat Systems’ two Lead Systems Integrators, Boeing and SAIC, team with KMW in a bid for the US Army’s next-generation IFV: The Ground Combat Vehicle program. GCV is now separate from Future Combat Systems, with the cancellation of FCS’ ground vehicle array in the FY 2010 budget. Boeing’s release states that:

“The team’s offering draws from the experience gained from the Manned Ground Vehicle and the Puma programs and will be built in the United States with a team of experienced American small and mid-tier supplier businesses.”

June 17/09: Formal approval of Puma IFV series production by the Federal Budget Committee of the German Parliament, as part of a larger package. Other elements of the approved defense package include 31 Trache 3a Eurofighters, 311 Spike-LR anti-armor missiles, 10 Wiesel 2 vehicles, and 5 minehnter ships. Sources: defpro.

Nov 17/08: Canada. Canada is reportedly looking to buy an IFV, and Germany’s Puma is reportedly a contender. Nevertheless, the Puma’s delivery schedule, pre-operational status, and lack of an in-place fleet available for immediate interim lease all weigh heavily against the vehicle’s chances.

In the end, no-one wins. Canada ends up canceling the CCV program more than once, and never buys anything.

Dec 10/07: Sub-contractors. Tognum AG subsidiary MTU Friedrichshafen announces that is about to receive the biggest single defense order in its history. With the Puma’s final tests scheduled for August 2008, MTU estimates that that the full order for the delivery of 405 drive systems with 10V 890 diesel engines will be placed by the end of 2008. “The order volume will probably amount to EUR 350 million and delivery will start in 2010.”

Nov 8/07: The German Bundestag’s budget committee clears the way for the procurement of 405 new Puma infantry fighting vehicles from PSM in Kassel, Germany. Rheinmetall AG in Dusseldorf and Krauss-Maffei Wegmann GmbH & Co. KG in Munich will effectively split a combined total of some EUR 3 billion (about $4.2 billion) in gross sales. Klaus Eberhardt, Chairman of the Executive Board of Rheinmetall AG, said that:

“This is the biggest single order in the history of our company, and definitely confirms our status as Europe’s top supplier of army technology.”

See: Rheinmetall release | KMW release.

May 5/06: PSM’s new PUMA infantry fighting vehicle is presented to the public during the Bundeswehr’s 50-year anniversary celebrations in Munster. Rheinmetall release.

Dec 20/05: Rollout. A prototype of the new AIFV Puma for the German Army was unveiled and presented to the German BWB contracting authority. PSM GmbH has thus met an important contractual milestone with the presentation of the so-called system demonstrator. Rheinmetall release.

Additional Readings & Sources

• Projekt System und Management GmbH (PSM) official site.
• KMW – Puma Infantry Fighting Vehicles.
• Rheinmetall – Armoured Tracked Vehicles. Includes Marder and Puma.
• Rheinmetall (February 2005) – The new Infantry Fighting Vehicle Puma: An investment in security.
• Defense Update – Multifunction Self Protection System (MUSS).
• EADS (Aug 10/07) – EADS Technology Protects German Armed Forces’ Puma Armoured Vehicles.
• Rheinmetall – Marder M1A3. 2010 snapshot.

Peer Competitors

• Singapore MINDEF – BIONIX II : Capabilities and Technical Specifications. See also ST Kinetics’ Bionix brochure [PDF], and a fine Wikipedia article. Bionix is much lighter, optimized for the conditions and terrain prevailing in SE Asia, and will serve beside Singapore’s new Leopard 2A4 tanks.
• Army Technology – Bradley M2 / M3 Tracked Armoured Fighting Vehicles, USA.
• DID Spotlight article – “The US Army’s Bradley Remanufacture Program.” Details re: current upgrades.
• Army Technology – CV90 Tracked Armoured Combat Vehicles, Sweden (BAE Hagglunds)
• KOIS – Next-generation armored vehicles to be deployed by 2008. Covers plans for the new XK-21 amphibious IFV, or KNIFV. Wikipedia also has a good article.

Search Tags: pumaifv

Many of Britain’s army vehicles are old and worn, and the necessities of hard service on the battlefield are only accelerating that wear. The multi-billion pound “Future Rapid Effects System” (FRES) aims to recapitalize the core of Britain’s armored vehicle fleet over the next decade or more.

The best one can say is that FRES has gone far better than America’s comparable and canceled “Future Combat System.” That doesn’t mean the rise has been smooth. FRES was spawned by the UK’s withdrawal from the German-Dutch-UK Boxer MRAV modular wheeled APC program, in order to develop a more deployable vehicle that fit Britain’s exact requirements. Those initial requirements were challenging, however, and experience in Iraq and Afghanistan led to decisions that changed an already-late program. So, too, have subsequent budgetary crises…

FRES: The Program

Program Goals

The UK Ministry of Defense’s FRES Integration Project Team described it this way:

“FRES will be the central pillar of a capable and highly deployable medium force which will be able to project power rapidly world-wide, complementing our existing heavy and light forces. The key drivers are the need for a rapid effect land capability, the ability to meet a wide number of operational roles, maximum interoperability with other UK forces and our allies, and addressing the obsolescence of existing vehicles. It is a challenging project, faced with the conundrum of balancing capability, affordability and early delivery.”

The roles FRES-Utility and FRES-Scout vehicles will undertake, and the number of vehicles to be bought, were determined by initial Assessment Phase studies. FRES is expected to provide Britain’s future medium-weight armored vehicles, and may replace current British armored vehicles such as the CVR (T) Scimitar/ Sabre/ Sultan/ Striker light tanks (1,255 vehicles), FV 430 family tracked Armored Personnel Carriers (1,492), and Saxon wheeled APCs (622) in the Army’s inventory.

The original plan for the FRES fleet involved as many as 3,000-3,500 vehicles, including as many as 2,000 wheeled Utility APCs. It began as the largest ever British Army program, with an expected cost of around GBP 16 billion for purchases, and through-life costs of about GBP 60 billion.

Subsequent plans under Britain’s budget-driven Army 2020 plan look set to slash those numbers drastically. Britain’s MoD won’t just how drastically, but a total buy of just several hundred is a likely outcome.

Program History

The first European Defense Agency head, Britain’s Nick Witney, may have made “reducing the number of national infantry fighting vehicles from 22 to 12” one of the EU’s Top 5 defense priorities – but his own government initially followed a very different script. FRES came to the fore after Britain pulled out of the MRAV “Boxer” Infantry Fighting Vehicle> project, which Germany and The Netherlands are still pursuing.

Technology Demonstrator Programme (TDP) contracts began the cycle in February 2005, and ran to late 2007. Their goal was in order to assess of what was possible, but changing battlefield requirements also elbowed their way into the process. MoD objectives for the vehicles solidified somewhat over this period, and included 4 main areas:

• Survivability via armor and other self-protection systems; experience in Iraq and Afghanistan has influenced this requirement, and changed it somewhat.
• Deployability by the A400M aircraft, which has a 35-tonne capacity. The original target vehicle weight of 17 tons, which would be deployable in the RAF’s C-130J Hercules, was abandoned; expected vehicle weight shifted to 20-27 tonnes (22-30 tons), and is likely to reach 30 tonnes/ 33 tons for FRES-UV. FRES-SV can carry up to 42t, but getting there would involve adding new equipment that could be removed for transport, or developing new variants.
• Networked-enabled capability via digital communication technology.
• Through-life upgrade potential throughout its anticipated 30 year service life.

Jane’s characterized FRES as a transformational system for the British armed forces, and the UK initially adopted a “Systems House” approach to its development, instead of having the military run it directly. The similarly-tasked U.S. Future Combat Systems program was also led and managed by Boeing and SAIC as Lead Systems Integrators, rather than by a military office. Under these systems, military reviews play a role at various pre-decided stage gates, and the military also plays an ongoing advisory role regarding changing requirements and capabilities, but a contractor is responsible for moving the program ahead and making key decisions, without the same level of red tape found in government programs. Under the UK’s approach, a Systems House who was “independent of product or manufacturing capability” led the initial Assessment Phase (iAP). Atkins played that role, which evaluated Britain’s options and issued technology development program (TDP) contracts. iAP lasted until 2008, when the Ministry of Defence itself stepped forward to declare finalists, conduct trials, and begin declaring its winners.

In total, 9 TDP contracts were issued, many of which are discussed in more detail in the Appendices. The FRES Technology Demonstrator Programs included:

• Stowage & Capacity (placed Feb/05, complete May/06) – DSTL, the Defence science and technology laboratory
  
• Hard Kill Defensive Aid System (placed May/05, completion due Dec/06) – Akers Krutbruk
  
• Chassis Concept TDP1: AHED (placed Aug/05, due Feb 07) – General Dynamics UK
  
• Chassis Concept TDP2: SEP (placed Dec/05, due Feb/07) – BAE Systems Haaglunds
  
• Electronic Architecture TDP 1 (placed Aug/05, due March/07) – Lockheed Martin UK
  
• Electronic Architecture TDP 2 (placed Aug/05, due March/07) – Thales
  
• Electric Armour TDP (placed Dec/05, due June/07) – Lockheed Martin / Insys
  
• Integrated Survivability (placed Dec/05, due Nov/06) – Thales UK
  
• Gap Crossing (placed Dec/05, due Oct/07) – BAE Systems

Boeing and Thales UK won the competition to play a similar role as the system-of-systems integrator (SOSI) during the FRES program’s production phase.

In the end, however, changes on the battlefield and criticism over the pace of FRES led the UK MoD to reach for more of an off-the-shelf vehicle solution. Neither of the vehicles involved in the TDP efforts was among the 3 finalists announced in June 2007, all of whom participated in the ministry’s FRES-UV ‘trials of truth’ in late 2007.

The FRES-UV winner wasn’t announced until May 2008, when General Dynamics’ Piranha-V beat France’s VBCI and the German-Dutch Boxer MRAV program that had been FRES’ origin. Negotiations subsequently stalled, however, and FRES-U/Medium Armor is now on the backburner indefinitely.

The program’s focus is now squarely on the FRES-SV Specialist Vehicle family. It includes the FRES Scout SV, the turretless Protected Mobility Recce Support base variant for Ambulance, Command, and Engineer Recce roles, the Recovery SV model, and the Repair SV model. Instead of replacing Britain’s Warrior IFVs in the armored infantry battalions, Scout SV vehicles will initially serve alongside them in the armored cavalry niche. Britain’s Warriors are getting upgrades, but they’l have to retire around 2030. What happens after that isn’t clear yet.

Phase 1: FRES-SV

The FRES integration and build contract remained up for grabs, and expected contenders included BAE Systems, General Dynamics UK, and Lockheed Martin UK. The FRES-SV reconnaissance version was also up for grabs, and was tied to a companion program a program to modernize Britain’s Warrior light IFVs.

General Dynamics UK eventually won FRES-SV, beating an upgraded model of BAE’s popular CV90 family with an ASCOD-2 variant of the infantry fighting vehicle (IFV) that serves in Austria and Spain. Modifications included a drive train designed to last the 30-year life of the vehicle, and the ability to support up to 42 tonnes/ 46.3 tons – a weight that would place FRES-SV at the low end for main battle tanks. A signed development contract followed in June 2010.

Variants will include Protected Mobility Recce Support (PMRS SV), a turretless variant that will be used for the Ambulance, Command, and Engineer Recce roles. Turretless Repair SV and Recovery SV variants are also planned, but their roles are so different that they become their own individual designs. The turreted Scout SV will be the most produced variant.

The turret’s novel design and impressive performance make it a key component for Scout SV. Indeed, the government mandated the use of BAE/Nexter’s 40mm CTAS gun system for both FRES-SV and Warrior WCSP. The core of its uniqueness resides in the “caseless telescoped” ammunition: the projectile is encased inside a cylinder, with the propellant packed around it instead of behind it. That cuts round length by about 50%, and improves space efficiency by about 33% for a given level of performance, which mitigates the natural space penalties that accompany a larger 40mm gun. Telescoped ammunition also allowed CTAI to replace the normal breech arrangement with a static ammunition feeder that feeds into a novel rotating breech, via a hollow trunion. That allows a more maintainable feeder that cuts the number of parts by over 50%, and can be located farther forward out of the crew’s way.

Best of all, the 1 kg HE (high-explosive) round has 3 times the hitting power of the Warrior’s previous 30mm Rarden shell, and its high explosive air burst (HEAB) capability allows detonation in mid-air at precise ranges. That’s very useful for firing into urban strongpoints, or over enemies hiding behind outside cover.

GD UK’s FRES-SV turret delivery team has a goal of 75% British content, and includes:

• Rheinmetall Land Systems (turret structure, cannon mounting structure, CT40 integration)
  
• Lockheed Martin UK Ampthill (fire control and training, turret integration authority)
  
• Curtiss Wright (turret drives and stabilization control)
  
• Defence Support Group (assembly integration and test)
  
• Meggitt (ammunition handling system)
  
• Moog (slip ring)
  
• Ultra Electronics (power management)

FRES-SV: Plans

The FRES SV requirement originally involved up to 3 “blocks” of up to 1,300 Reconnaissance, Medium Armour, and Manoeuvre Support vehicles, and a wide variety of potential variants. As of August 2009, the plan was down to 1,238:

• Recce Block 1: 589 Scout, Repair, Recovery, and Protected Mobility variants. Seen as the highest priority.
  
• Recce Block 2: up to 141 vehicles
  
• Recce Block 3: up to 280 vehicles
  
• Medium Armour: up to 193 vehicles
  
• Manoeuvre Support: up to 35 vehicles

The current Army 2020 plan looks set to cut those totals significantly, with FRES-SV vehicles equipping just 1 armored cavalry regiment within each of 3 armored infantry brigades. FRES-UV numbers also look set to take a cut, equipping only each of the 3 brigades’ Heavy Protected Mobility battalion.

At the same time, the in-service date for FRES has slipped from 2009, and is now no earlier than 2015 for FRES-SV. FRES-UV remains without a contract, or a planned in-service date. A 2008 UK Parliamentary report conveyed the Atkins system house’s doubts that FRES vehicles would be operational in any significant numbers before 2017. That was seen as shocking when they said it – but it may prove to be optimistic.

FRES: Contracts & Key Events

June 15/18: Ajax trials The British Army’s new Ajax armored fighting vehicle (AFV) is currently undergoing field trials, before the first variants are delivered to operational units early in 2019. The Ajax is part of the multi-billion pound “Future Rapid Effects System” (FRES) program. FRES aims to recapitalize the core of Britain’s armored vehicle fleet over the next decade or more. Ajax vehicles are developed upon a highly-adaptable and capable Common Base Platform, maximizing commonality in mobility, electronic architecture and survivability. Each Ajax platform variant has extensive capabilities, including acoustic detectors, a laser warning system, a local situational awareness system, an electronic countermeasure system, a route marking system, an advanced electronic architecture and a high-performance power pack. Ajax will be the medium weight core of the British Army’s deployable Intelligence, Surveillance, Target Acquisition and Reconnaissance (ISTAR) capability. It enables the soldier to be at the point of collection of accurate all-weather commander information within a network-enabled digitized platform. The current trials are the final phase of a series of evaluations to approve the vehicle for land warfare operations before it enters full service with the British Army.

September 19/17: General Dynamics Land Systems UK has commenced live firing trials for its AJAX armored vehicle program. The trials are being held in West Wales, Great Britain, and will last for approximately five months, starting with static firing positions against immobile point targets and gradually progressing to a moving vehicle engaging moving targets. It is armed with the CT 40 autocannon and a coaxial 7.62mm chain gun for lighter targets. Used by both the UK and French armed forces, the CT 40 ustilizes a type of telescoping 40mm ammunition designed to take up less space and reduce the necessary size of the gun. It can fire armor-piercing discarding sabot and high-explosive airburst ammunition out to an effective range of 2500 meters. It has a maximum rate of fire of up to 200 rounds per minute.

Sept 13/14: Industrial. Defense News reports that there’s a problem with the cost of assembling the FRES-SV vehicles in Britain, when compared to lower costs for vehicles from GD Santa Barbara Sistemas in Spain. That’s a problem for many reasons, not least of which is the fact that General Dynamics’ industrial proposals in Britain were reportedly a key element in their contract win (q.v. March 15/10). To make matters worse, the FRES-SV decision also led to closures at BAE that included their Newcastle armored vehicle plant in 2012 (q.v. May 31/12).

So much for promises that 80% of ASCOD SV’s full rate production and 70% of its total supply chain will be based in the UK, securing or creating “over 10,600 jobs.” The original plan was to build 100 vehicles entirely at GD Santa Barbara Sistemas, in order to efficiently reach Initial Operational Capability. After that, the Spanish plant would provide hulls only, with the remainder of assembly and manufacturing taking place at Britain’s state-owned Defence Support Group (DSG).

The whole thing begins to look like a very poor policy decision if DSG is very inefficient by comparison, or even a bait-and-switch. The government has asked General Dynamics to go over the figures again, but one could be forgiven for wondering what leverage the government actually has at this point. If the additional costs of DSG-built vehicles are too high, the size of the FRES-SV program would leave the government with a very unpleasant decision to make. Sources: Defense News, “British MoD Reconsiders Assembling Scout in UK”.

June 25/14: FRES-UV. The British Army will conduct renewed 8-month trials of a heavily-modified VBCI, as a follow-on to the The Lancaster House agreement (q.v. Nov 2/10) regarding the 2 countries’ defense industries. Activities will begin before the end of 2014 at France’s Canjeurs military base, before moving to Mourmelon. VBCI’s export version has some important changes:

“Speaking to IHS Jane’s at Eurosatory 2014 in Paris, Philip Dunne, UK Minister for Defence Equipment, Support, and Technology, said the VBCI had fallen down on three elements in the original competition: accessibility to the vehicle’s powerpack, the vehicle’s armour protection levels, and its growth potential…. “VBCI has undergone a significant upgrade”, he added…. [Nexter’s] new export variant of the VBCI…. included the ability to remove the vehicle’s powerpack in the field (a British but not a French requirement), and an improved suspension and transmission to increase the VBCI’s maximum weight from 29 tonnes to 32 tonnes – meeting the British need for growth potential and improved protection…. Other improvements include fourth-axle steering, a repositioned fuel tank, upgraded cooling and engine performance, and small hull reconfigurations to increase the vehicle’s internal volume.”

The bad news? Under the revised “Army 2020” plan, FRES UV has dropped from initial estimates of around 2,000 vehicles to just 1 Heavy Protected Mobility (HPM) battalion in each of 3 mechanized brigades. There’s no firm date for that buy, either, as relatively new 6-wheeled Mastiff v-hulled vehicles already occupy the HPM role. Sources: DID, “VBCI: France’s Wheeled APC” | IHS Jane’s Defence Weekly, “British Army to trial VBCI”.

June 16/14: Weapons. The WSCP’s 40mm Cased Telescoped Armament System has achieved qualification certification from the UK and France for the 40mm cannon and 2 tracer round types: APFSDS armor piercing and TP full target practice rounds.

CT40 qualification certification allows manned firing demonstration phases to begin for Britain’s FRES-Scout and WCSP programs, and for the French DGA’s EBRC wheeled light tank program. The program will work to certify the other initial ammunition types (A3B anti-aerial airburst, Point detonating and Airburst general purpose tracer rounds, and a low-cost reduced range TPPR-T training round) over the next 2 years, in time for the first delivery of the UK’s series production vehicles. The French EBRC program is expected to start full development in 2015. Sources: CTAI, “CTA International achieves Anglo-French qualification for the 40mm Cased Telescoped Cannon and Ammunition”.

April 28/14: PMRS CDR. The UK Ministry of Defence passes FRES-SV’s turretless Protected Mobility Recce Support (PMRS) base platform through the Base Platform Critical Design Review (CDR). The review covered mine and ballistic survivability; human factors design; PMRS system architecture; its sub-systems, such as the running gear, suspension, auto controls and propulsion; and PMRS specific design interfaces, including for the vehicle’s electronic architecture, C4I equipment, towing and storage.

Note that when the demonstration contract was signed (q.v. July 1/10), full trials of the prototype vehicle were expected to begin no later than 2013. They’re a bit behind.

PMRS is the 1st variant-specific CDR for the SCOUT-SV program, and it will produce a turretless vehicle carrying 2 crew and just 4 soldiers. Variants will be used for Ambulance, Command, and Engineer Reece roles. Delivery of the first PMRS variant pre-production prototype is expected in 2014, following PMRS’ overarching CDR. The Scout SV infantry fighting vehicle, Recovery SV, and Repair SV will follow later. Sources: GD-UK, “General Dynamics UK completes Base Platform Critical Design Review for Specialist Vehicle variant”.

Feb 13/14: NAO Report. Britain’s National Audit Office releases their 2013 Major Projects Report, as well as their review of Britain’s 2013-2023 Equipment Plan. With respect to FRES Specialist Vehicles, the number of vehicles planned is redacted. The NAO report adds:

“It should be noted that Specialist Vehicles does not have a single Main Gate Approval. The size of the programme, together with previous lessons learned in other programmes, determined that a two stage Main Gate approach should be used; Main Gate 1 for entry into Demonstration for Recce Block 1 and Common Base Platform only, with a second Main Gate (2) for entry into production, the latter being the major investment decision. Later approvals (in effect sub- Main Gates) will approve Demonstration and Manufacture of the remaining Protected Mobility Recce Support roles and any future needs.”

Jan 29/14: Parliamentary Report. The House of Commons Defence Committee publishes a report regarding Britain’s fuzzy “Army 2020” plans. Key excerpts:

“We are surprised that such a radical change to the Army’s structure, reflecting a reduction of 12,000 personnel from that announced in SDSR 2010, was not discussed at the National Security Council (NSC)…. As well as setting out the proposed new structure for the Army, the plan announced there would be 17 fewer major units in the Army with a reduction of 23 units from the Order of Battle[51] in total by disbanding and merging several units….

We note that the Secretary of State for Defence accepts that Army 2020 was designed to fit a financial envelope. We are concerned that this consideration took primacy over the country’s abilities to respond to the threats, risks and uncertainties contained in the National Security Strategy. We were also concerned to hear that it was the Ministry of Defence’s Permanent Secretary who told the Chief of the General Staff the future size of the Army under the Army 2020 plan. We call on the MoD to explain the apparent lack of consultation and involvement of the Chief of the General Staff in the decision-making process that has affected his Service so fundamentally….

In its response to this Report, we recommend that the MoD provide us with an assessment of how the Army 2020 plans will affect the “Fighting Power” of the Army providing comparable assessments of both current fighting power and projected fighting power following the completion of the Army 2020 plans.”

Sources: UK Parliament, “Defence Committee – Ninth Report
Future Army 2020“.

Jan 13/14: -SV plans. Britain’s MoD endorses an update to the FRES-SV Acquisition Strategy. The turretless Protected Mobility Recce Support vehicle variant will be used with minor sub-system changes for the Ambulance, Command, and Engineer Recce roles. Further studies have been contracted to assess requirements for the turreted Scout SV, and the Repair and Recovery variants. Sources: NAO Major Projects Report 2013.

Sept 10/13: -SV Testing. The lead contractor for FRES-SV touts testing efforts to date:

“Since [DSEI 2011], General Dynamics UK has been putting its Mobile Test Rig (MTR) – the precursor to a prototype Specialist Vehicle (SV) – through an extensive series of trials…. The MTR is similar in design to the Protected Mobility Recce Support (PMRS) variant of SV, which itself is capable of carrying a crew of two and up to four dismountable troops.

The MTR began its tests [in June 2012]…. To date, the MTR has undertaken… cold weather and Operational and Tactical (O&T) mobility trials… over 1,800km. The O&T trials demonstrated the vehicles ability to withstand extreme lower temperatures and to meet the demanding mobility requirements of the SV programme, during which the MTR towed a total of 92 tonnes train weight over 300km. The next phase of trialling will be the grueling Accelerated Life Testing (ALT) schedule…. On completion of the ALT activities, MTR will have covered over 10,000km and will have provided crucial reliability and performance data to inform the design and manufacture of the six demonstration phase prototype SV platforms.”

Sources: GD-UK, “General Dynamics UK unveils Specialist Vehicle Mobile Test Rig at DSEI 2013”.

July 2013: Army 2020. The British MoD clarifies its reduced force structure plan under Army 2020. British armored forces will see an especial cut, with 3 mechanized brigades and 16 Air Assault Brigade in the “Reaction Force,” while the “Adaptable Force” would include 7 infantry brigades as its combat force.

The initial 2012 document (q.v. May 26/12) made it clear that FRES-SV would only have a role in the armored cavalry regiments. Each mechanized brigade has just 1 of those, which pairs FRES-SV and Challenger tanks. The rest of the brigade includes 1 full Challenger tank regiment, 2 armored infantry battalions with Warrior IFVs, and a Heavy Protected Mobility battalion with blast-resistant Mastiff vehicles. The HPM battalion might be outfitted with FRES-UV wheeled armored vehicles later on, but neither type of FRES armored vehicle was listed for the “Adaptable Force,” which will supposedly rely on standard wheeled patrol vehicles.

This structure seems to represent a drastic cut to the overall FRES program, but Britain’s government and ministry are avoiding those kinds of details. Sources: UK MoD, “Transforming The British Army: An Update – July 2013” and “Transforming The British Army, July 2012”.

June 19/12: Weapons. At the Eurosatory 2012 show, French operators give the Javelin anti-tank missile high marks for performance in Afghanistan, and the Javelin JV is in talks with 2 French firms to integrate Javelin with the BAE/Nexter CT40 turret. Nexter is the first firm, of course.

At the same time, Panhard General Defense is working with Lockheed Martin UK to develop its Sphinx medium 6×6 wheeled armored vehicle concept for France’s EBRC light tank competition. Lockheed Martin UK expects to leverage its turret work from the British FRES-SV and WCSP programs for EBRC, and the Javelin missile is already a mainstay in British service. Which means that any Javelin integration work performed for the French market could eventually filter back to those British armored programs. Sources: Army Recognition, “Lockheed Martin at Eurosatory 2012”.

May 31/12: Industrial. BAE closes its main armored vehicle production facility at Newcastle-on-Tyne.

“BAE said the proposal to close the Newcastle site at the end of 2013 followed a business review which concluded that there was no prospect of new UK armoured vehicle manufacturing work once production of the Terrier ends next year.”

Sources: Daily Mail, “Tank builder shuts after 165 years because of slump in orders” | Mirror, “Tanks and goodnight: Historic defence factory to close with loss of hundreds of jobs”.

May 26/12: FRES-SV delay? Defense News quotes unnamed British sources, who say that the new Army 2020 plan is likely to extend FRES SV’s GBP 500 million pound demonstration phase, cut the total number of planned vehicles, and delay operational introduction to 2020 or beyond. Excerpt:

“The MoD has never publicly acknowledged the expected in-service date for the Scout vehicle, although Army officers at last year’s DSEi exhibition in London said it was 2015…. A MoD spokeswoman said: …The funding for the [GBP 5.5 billion] vehicle pipeline, which also includes the Warrior Capability Sustainment Program, a [FRES] utility vehicle and improvements to Challenger 2, will be prioritized, according to the Army’s requirements. In the case of Scout, production numbers and delivery dates will be confirmed at Main Gate…”

Sources: UK MoD – Transforming The British Army, July 2012″ [PDF] | Defense News, “U.K. May Delay Major Vehicle Buy”.

May 14/12: Politics. The UK MoD confirms in its Planning Round 2012 (PR12) announcement that GBP 5.5 billion in funding is available for its future Armoured Fighting Vehicle (AFV) pipeline, which includes the FRES-Specialist Vehicle program. GD-UK is predictably pleased:

“We welcome the announcement by the Secretary of State for Defence confirming that the SV programme is secure in the MoD’s future AFV pipeline and core programme of committed funding,” commented Dr. Sandy Wilson, president and managing director of General Dynamics UK…. A recent audit study by Ernst & Young concluded that the SV programme would generate total economic output of over [GBP] 9.8 billion, with a corresponding Gross Value Added1 (GVA) of [GBP] 4.7 billion over the life of the programme. To this end, General Dynamics UK recently invested £12 million in state of the art facilities in Wales, establishing a Centre of Excellence for Land Systems…”

Sources: GD-UK, “UK MoD confirms commitment to Specialist Vehicle programme in Armoured Fighting Vehicle pipeline”.

May 4/11: Sub-contractors. Curtiss-Wright Corporation announces a contract from Lockheed Martin to provide the Scout reconnaissance vehicle’s servo system for weapon stabilization.

The demonstration phase contract has an option for production deliveries, and continues through December 2013. Curtiss-Wright will design, develop and manufacture the turret drive servo system at their Motion Control facility in Neuhausen, Switzerland.

March 23/11: Industrial. Lockheed Martin UK announces 60 new jobs at their Ampthill site, now that they have secured a contract to deliver the turret for the new FRES SV.

March 6/12: Sub-contractors. ViaSat Inc. is picked by General Dynamics UK Ltd. to design and develop the on-board encrypted data storage systems for FRES-SV, scheduled to begin trials with the British Army in January 2013.

ViaSat has developed the only hardware based data encryption technology approved by Britain’s CESG for the protection of Top Secret data at rest. The system also includes purge controls to delete data encryption keys. Overall, its EDS systems will allow FRES-SV vehicles to securely capture, analyze, store, and share over 6 TB of intelligence data. The Specialist Vehicle Encryption and Purge Solution will be modular, able to be switched out as needed, and more easily upgraded over the vehicle’s lifetime. ViaSat.

Jan 17/11: Political. IHS Jane’s reports that:

“The biggest hit for the British Army in the Government’s economy package falls on what had been known as the Future Rapid Effect System (FRES) programme, focused on delivering medium weight armour. Already long-delayed and effectively in abeyance, the programme has now seen army officers drop bids for funding to build both the medium armour [DID: FRES-U] and manoeuvre support FRES variants from the service’s 2011 spending and planning round (PR11) pitch…. “

Being left out of PR11 isn’t a death sentence in and of itself, but the more time FRES variants spend as a lower-priority item, the lower their long-term fielding odds become. Other programs expected to be on the “unfunded” list for PR11 include UOR electronic countermeasures for use against IED land mines, bringing satellite communication equipment into the core force, fielding blast-resistant Wolfhound/ Husky/ Coyote supply vehicles across the wider army, new chemical/biological/radiological/nuclear protective equipment; arming Watchkeeper MK450B UAVs, and funding ongoing improvements to the Bowman communication system beyond 2015.

Dec 2/10: Sub-contractors. Lockheed Martin UK announces that General Dynamics UK has issued a contract to deliver 3 turrets for the FRES Scout reconnaissance vehicle, to be used in the Demonstration Phase Integration and Test efforts.

As previous entries indicate, Lockheed Martin has been working on this for some time. Some of that happened during the bid phase. Other work was covered by UK MoD advance funding ahead of a full contract agreement with prime contractor General Dynamics UK, in order to ensure that the FRES-SV Demonstration Phase schedule remained fully on track. While contract negotiations continue between General Dynamics UK and the UK MoD, Lockheed Martin UK is also in negotiations with its suppliers, in order to finalize industrial arrangements for the turret.

June 24/10: Sub-contractors. General Dynamics UK unveils its Scout SV turret for ASCOD SV at Britain’s Defence Vehicle Dynamics 2010 exhibition. The turret is designed around the CT40 Cased Telescoped Cannon System, which was successfully integrated and fired by turret provider Lockheed Martin UK Ampthill at the beginning of 2010. Over 75% of turret-related work will be done in the UK.

The ASCOD SV turret has a turret-ring diameter of 1.7m, which is wider than older vehicles such as the Warrior. The hull is also designed to accommodate a 2.1m turret ring, which would offer the ability to carry a 105mm or 120mm gun in order to field a fire support variant (the CV90 family has already fielded and tested the CV90-120). ASCOD SV’s turret design places the main ammunition feed under-armor, but outside the turret crew compartment. This gives soldiers in the turret more room, even wearing full body armour and future wearable systems, and offers room for additional systems (probably power) to be added inside. General Dynamics UK.

March 15/10: -SV Competition. BAE Systems announces plans to save and create a total of 800 jobs (400 layoffs canceled, 400 jobs added) at its Newcastle manufacturing site, shifting away from its initial plans to build the base CV90 platform on the current manufacturing line in Sweden, and then fit it out and finish it in the UK. The move comes in response to a March 13/10 report in the Financial Times the British government is ready to award the FRES-SV contract to General Dynamics.

Media reports say that BAE was initially told it was in the “box seat” to win the order, after spending GBP 50 million and 5 years designing a CV90 variant that it believes to be technically superior to its competition, a General Dynamics ASCOD variant. Reports now indicate that the General Dynamics proposal had a more attractive industrial component. Defence Management | Defense News | IBTimes | Reuters | London Telegraph.

Feb 26/10: -SV Competition. Jane’s reports that the FRES-SV industrial programs have become an issue in the competition. General Dynamics UK reportedly said it expects to safeguard or create more than 10,500 jobs in 8 regions of the UK, if its ASCOD vehicle wins. This presumably includes jobs at component suppliers, and possibly economic multiplier effects.

At the same time, BAE Systems had warned that its UK military land vehicle concerns will become a “dwindling support services business” should the group fail to be selected to meet the UK FRES-SV and the Warrior Capability Sustainment Plan. In other words, significant layoffs.

Feb 25/10: -SV Competition. The MoD’s Investment Approvals Board (IAB) meets, with discussions including the GBP 1 billion Warrior Capability Sustainment Program upgrades to Britain’s Warrior IFVs, and MoD Defence Equipment & Support’s recommendation in the FRES-SV competition. Jane’s report | PURCON | Defense News re: IAB’s agenda.

Feb 22/10: Weapons. BAE Systems announces that they’re starting to build a GBP 4.5 million Turret Test Rig (TTR) for the FRES Scout and Warrior upgrade programs. The rig is closely modeled on BAE Systems’ Mission Equipment Vibration Table (MEVT) in Minneapolis, built for the US Future Combat Systems program. Indeed, systems modeling and analysis manager Vince Whelan relocated from Minneapolis.

The TTR is designed to take a turret through a 20-year life-span in 12-18 months by subjecting it to “shake, rattle and roll” tests under extremes of temperature. Electronic components in particular tend to dislike vibration, but the life of an armored vehicle makes a lot of vibration inevitable. Testing must be done, but field testing is inefficient and expensive. Hence the development of facilities like TTR/MEVT.

Nov 5/09: -SV Competition. General Dynamics UK announces that its FRES-SV bid is in, and cites the design’s weight and growth potential. Its ASCOD SV will use Lockheed Martin UK INSYS as its turret designer and provider.

Nov 1/09: -SV Competition. A BAE release adds more details about their bid for the initial GBP 2 million “Recce Block 1” FRES-SV phase, including information about expected production. The chassis will be built at the company’s existing production line at Ornskoldsvik, Sweden, using parts from a number of UK suppliers. The Scout turret and UK mission fit will be built in the UK, and integrated onto the chassis in the UK.

According to the release, BAE’s demonstrator vehicle has already begun mobility trials at Millbrook proving ground, and fired its weapon system at the Shoeburyness range.

Sept 9/09: -SV Competition. BAE unveils its FRES-SV Scout demonstrator at DESi 2009. It’s based on a lowered CV90 chassis, with upgraded electronics and the requisite stabilized CTAS 40mm turret.

CTAS will form the foundation for the FRES Scout and the Warrior Capability Sustainment Programme (WCSP), and its 40mm high explosive round has more than 3x the explosive power of the 30mm Rarden that equips the current Warrior vehicles. Testing is underway. The WSCP and FRES-SV turrets will be somewhat different, but will be based on a common gun and electronic architecture. Defence Management.

July 9/09: -SV Competition. The UK Ministry of Defence has announced that it will extend FRES-SV’s draft Invitation to Tender to BAE Systems Global Combat Systems, and to General Dynamics UK. Their competing models are intended to provide reconnaissance and reconnaissance support vehicles to replace the British Army’s existing CVR (T) Scimitar and Spartan vehicles. The final Invitation to Tender is expected to be issued later in July 2009, following this initial assessment phase.

BAE has at least 2 main choices for FRES-SV. Reports to date indicate that it is likely to offer its tracked SEP/Thor modular vehicle, a new design whose wheeled model could easily become the back-door choice for FRES-U/MA – if the tracked variant wins FRES-SV, and if subsequent negotiations go well. The other option is its popular CV90 series, which is already combat tested and in service with several countries. It offers a more proven solution, a wide array of developed variants, and allied interoperability benefits, at the price of having less cross-over potential.

General Dynamics is offering an upgraded ASCOD 2 IFV. This joint project of General Dynamics’ subsidiaries Santa Barbara Sistemas and Steyr-Daimler-Puch has been fielded by Spain (as the Pizarro IFV) and Austria (as the Ulan IFV); several specialty variants are already in service.

Dec 15/08: Industrial. Bloomberg News quotes BAE spokesman Mike Sweeny as saying that BAE will review the future of its UK Land Systems unit following the UK MoD’s FRES decision. BAE had lost 2 critical opportunities to participate in FRES so far, and had pinned its hopes on becoming the manufacturing contractor for the modified FRES- Utility Piranha V design. When talks collapsed between General Dynamics MOWAG and the UK over ownership of the vehicles’ intellectual property, and placed the FRES-UV vehicle on the back-burner, that opportunity evaporated.

BAE is also competing for the FRES-SV scout vehicle, offering its Thor/SEP vehicle which comes in wheeled and tracked variants. The SEP is designed by BAE’s Hagglunds unit in Sweden, however, and would not enter service until 2013 at the earliest.

In November 2008, BAE Land Systems said it would cut as many as 200 jobs because production work has dwindled to the Pinzgauer armored truck and Terrier general support engineer vehicle, plus an unspecified project for a Middle Eastern client. Upgrade and integration work on systems like the AS90 mobile howitzer, FV430 Mk3 Bulldog APC, Warrior IFV, and others wasn’t deemed sufficient. BAE has now said that it said it can’t rule out further plant closures and job cuts in Britain.

Nov 3/08: FRES-UV. The Financial Times of London writes:

“Six months after selecting General Dynamics [MOWAG] to provide the design for the first variant of the new vehicles, the MoD has been unable to agree final contractual terms with the US group [DID: GD MOWAG is in Switzerland]…. the two parties have been unable to agree certain elements of the final contract. The protracted negotiations have also delayed the competition for the vehicle integrator, the job of assembling the vehicle, fitting it out and making sure it can work with all the other high-tech systems in the forces. BAE Systems, General Dynamics, Lockheed Martin and Finmeccanica are all in the running for the role.”

The article reports that the UK MoD is revisiting the acquisition process, and that elements of FRES could be delayed as a result of the impasse.

Oct 16/08: Lockheed Martin UK announces an study contract from Atkins, the FRES program’s system house. The study will work to help the UK MoD refine the FRES-SV scout vehicle’s user and systems requirements, cost estimates and schedule to delivery, with a particular focus on integrating the FRES mission systems into a combat-effective, affordable and low-risk Scout turret concept. The work will also build upon the FRES Electronic Architecture Technology Demonstrator Programme (EATDP) that Lockheed Martin UK and its teammates delivered for MoD through Atkins in 2007.

Lockheed Martin’s principal sub-contractors will be SciSys and Ultra Electronics. Lockheed Martin UK release.

March 11/08: Not Off-the-Shelf. The House of Commons issues its 2007-08 defence equipment report. With respect to FRES, the report describes the MoD’s go-forward approach – which is not about an off-the-shelf purchase:

“We note that the FRES Utility Vehicle design which has been recommended is a “developmental vehicle” and that the MoD considers that this is the best option as it can be upgraded and its capability increased over time. We also note that the MoD considers that acquiring an “off-the-shelf” vehicle would not provide scope for increasing capability and would have a very limited life. While we recognise that these are strong arguments for acquiring a developmental vehicle for the FRES Utility Vehicle, such an option is also likely to involve higher costs and increased risks to the in-service date because of unforeseen problems during the further development. If the recommended design is approved, the MoD needs to ensure that it identifies the key risks on the programme and how these are to be managed.”

Read: “Britain Releases Defence Equipment 2008 Report” for more information and links.

Nov 29/07: Delayed. Bob Ainsworth, the UK’s Minister of State for Armed Forces, announces a slight delay:

“The Future Rapid Effect System (FRES) has a vital role to play in the future of the British Army. We stated that we would announce the outcome of the utility vehicle design trials by the end of November. I am delighted to announce today that these trials have been successfully completed on schedule, and that a recommendation has been produced based on technical design considerations. Further work with all three possible providers will be undertaken over the next few weeks in order to clarify the commercial implications of their proposals. Following this, a definitive announcement will be made on the preferred design to be taken through the remainder of assessment phase of this part of the FRES programme.”

Nov 22/07: Competition. With the stakes growing after 2 losses in the FRES competition, BAE Systems unveils its bid team for the FRES integration and build contract: BAE Land Systems, BAE Insyte, SAIC, QinetiQ, SELEX S&AS, GE Aviation, and Cranfield University.

Nov 6/07: Competition. A Defense News report reads the tea leaves and believes the French VBCI has an edge in the FRES competition. Meanwhile, assessment-phase contracts have been awarded in the tracked FRES-Recon for BAE Systems’ CV90 (not SEP) and General Dynamics UK’s ASCOD for scout, indirect fire control, ground-based surveillance and other roles.

They quote BAE Systems Land Systems Managing Director Andrew Davies as saying that BAE, who has been eliminated from the FRES-Utility finals and Systems of Systems contracts, “must win the last piece of the FRES utility program – the integration-and-build contract – or consider shutting the Newcastle plant.”

Oct 5/07: SoSI. The UK MoD announces that Thales UK and Boeing’s Defence UK subsidiary have been selected as the preferred bidders for the role of System of Systems Integrator (SOSI) for the Future Rapid Effect System (FRES) program. The SOSI team is supposed to act as an independent, honest broker between industry and the MoD to co-ordinate FRES procurement, providing service elements including: systems of systems engineering and integration; alliance development and management; development of the MoD’s SOSI competence; through-life capability management; and through-life technology management.

The selection represents the second important loss for BAE in the FRES program, the first blow being the elimination of its SEP wheeled/tracked vehicle family from the finalists’ roster.

The MoD announcement also mentions their appointment of the legal firm Herbert Smith to provide the FRES team with intellectual property, commercial and legal advice. Their role is to ensure that the Intellectual Property, Design Authority, and systems architecture for FRES will reside in the UK, per the government’s Defence Industrial Strategy. UK MoD release | Thales release | Boeing release.

Sept 13/07: Competition. Jane’s reports from DESi 2007 that General Dynamics UK is making an offer its competitors won’t be able to match:

“General Dynamics UK has confirmed that…. there is a potential export market for up to 2,000 Piranha Vs (8×8) over a 10-year period. These would all be supplied from the UK production line, because the UK would have a complete technology transfer package, as well as the full intellectual property rights as stipulated by the UK Ministry of Defence.”

June 14/07: Politics. Stung by criticism that the MoD has wasted years in order to select off-the-shelf vehicles that may not be survivable enough, Minister for Defence Equipment and Support Lord Drayson fires back in a public forum:

“Yes, the Boxer was a programme the MoD pulled out of when it was known as the MRAV programme. We took that decision in 2002 in light of the requirement at the time. We have since reviewed the FRES requirement in light of recent operational experience in Iraq and Afghanistan. Force protection in theatre now has a higher priority than strategic deployability – I don’t think anyone would argue with that view. When the situation changes our procurement process must be capable of responding to that change….. Iâ€m not going to go into the details of the protection FRES will have in a public forum…. But to suggest that we are ignoring the threats we face in Iraq and Afghanistan today when we set the requirement for our future vehicles is wrong. And the idea that taking into account the full range of threats FRES will be less well protected than the patrol vehicles you list (such as the Mastiff) is also wrong. Finally, let’s all be clear that FRES is neither a protected patrol vehicle nor a replacement for Warrior….”

Given Canada’s poor experiences with wheeled vehicles in Afghanistan, and the Stryker’s emerging difficulties against new IED land mines in Iraq, this may become a recurring subject.

June 5/07: SoSI. The UK MoD recently announced its intention to form a Ministry of Defence/ Industry Alliance for FRES. A key role in this Alliance is that of the System of Systems Integrator. Thales UK and Boeing Defence UK have now announced that they will jointly bid for the SOSI role. Thales UK will be the lead firm in the partnership.

If selected, Thales and Boeing would be partnered with the MoD to deliver a timely and coherent through-life capability to the British Army that would include both the vehicles and long-term support services, while meeting UK industrial goals under the Defence Industrial Strategy and retaining key intellectual property rights for the MoD. Thales UK touts its “excellent understanding of the Armored Fighting Vehicle domain,” systems integration skils, and “in-depth understanding of UK doctrine and concepts.” Boeing touts its “proven experience and expertise in successfully executing system-of-systems integration programs” (it’s one of the SOSI-type leads for the USA’s Future Combat Systems, with SAIC), and “world-class program management… and supply chain management skill.” Boeing release | Thales UK release.

March 19/07: Competition. BAE Hagglunds announced that its new SEP 8×8 modular vehicle system is now ready for the UK Ministry of Defence’s upcoming trials for FRES Utility Vehicles.

Feb 21/07: Report. The UK’s Parliamentary Defence Committee published its Seventh Report of Session 2006-07: The Army’s requirement for armoured vehicles: the FRES programme, HC 159 [PDF] | Committee release: “Make Up Your Mind On Army’s Armoured Vehicles, Defence Committee Tells MoD.” The report is highly critical of the UK MoD’s multiple plans over the years to replace Britain’s medium armor, expresses concern over weight requirements/ air transportability, lack of joint cooperation with any other country, a potential lack of soldier input, and expresses doubts that FRES vehicles can be fielded before 2017.

The UK MoD’s reply asserts that risk reduction requires the current pace, and alludes to the fact that past Parliamentary complaints re: the MoD have involved excessive risk and project overruns.

For a summary of February events, including links to and excerpts from these publications, see the DID article “Britain’s FRES Program has a Full February.”

Feb 19/07: Jane’s Defence Weekly reports that BAE Systems Hagglunds has completed the first of two new 8×8 Integrated Demonstrator armored fighting vehicles on schedule. These SEP-based vehicles were developed using company funding, in close co-operation with BAE Systems Land Systems of the UK. As noted above, BAE is competing against a General Dynamics UK vehicle to meet the British Army’s Future Rapid Effect System (FRES) Utility Vehicle (UV) requirement.

Feb 12/07: Competition. Following the endorsement of the FRES Acquisition Strategy and the publication of the EOI for the Utility Vehicle competitions, the latest FRES requirements documents are now being made available in order to keep industry informed as the requirements mature prior to final release later [in 2007]. See MoD bulletin.

Jan 26/07: Competition. Jane’s Defence Weekly reports that The UK Defence Procurement Agency (DPA) has begun seeking expressions of interest from companies for the delivery of the FRES-UV (Utility Vehicles) phase. The DPA release to industry, via the Defence Contracts Bulletin (DCB) on January 25th, offers an invitation to tender (ITT) for both the vehicle integrator and design packages of the UV programme. The move will end FRES’ initial assessment phase as it begins a transition toward acquisition.

July 17/06: Industrial. Boeing announces that it is expanding its presence in the UK with the establishment of a new facility in Bristol, England, to support its growing defense business activities. The new facility is part of Boeing Defence UK, Ltd. and will support Boeing’s efforts on the Future Rapid Effect System (FRES) program.

Appendix 1 – The British Army’s Armored Vehicle Fleet, late 2006

A New Procurement Approach: The System House Challenges

The crucial Systems House contract was placed with Atkins on Nov 16/04. Could Atkins cut the fat, successfully slim down the procurement process, and deliver the promised results?

In some ways, it’s hard to determine, because battlefield needs and other pressures ended up taking the entire competition in a very different direction. The broad aims of the Assessment Phase were:

• To further define the FRES capability required given the military operational concepts that underpin the concept, and develop a series of affordable options for meeting the FRES requirement.
• To develop optimum procurement and support strategies for future phases in order to present a robust case at the point of go/no-go decision.
• To manage technology and supplier risk to acceptable levels.

In the UK, some of these goals were certainly achieved. The FRES program has been criticized in Parliament for its delays, but the combination of very new technologies to evaluate and changing requirements on the customer end could hardly have produced anything else. In the USA, the capabilities and effects based (vs. specifications based), system integrator led FCS process has run into difficulties on the very points noted above, plus a couple of areas that are unique to the American program’s vast breadth.

In both cases, however, the countries involved are attempting to sidestep the disconnected and slow processes associated with developing each weapon in the system as an individual military-run project with detailed specifications at all stages. Given that conventional military design and procurement programs can take anywhere from 8-20 years on average, the speed of technology’s advance has made compressing this process something of a necessity.

These kinds of attempts are definitely an industry trend in Western countries. Whether FCS and FRES succeed or fail, procurement structure experiments will continue to be tried around the world as advanced armies embark on “military transformation” projects that tax both existing technology limits and military procurement systems’ ability to deliver.

FRES: Key Challenges for the Contractors

The contractors face two key challenges in designing the FRES. One has to do with its electronic architecture, an extremely important facet of any vehicle built with network-centric warfare in mind. The other challenge has to do with balancing the more conventional variables of weight, protection, and firepower in light of modern anti-armor threats that range from increasingly sophisticated anti-tank rockets to IED land mines.

Electronic Architecture Technology Demonstrator Programme (EA TDP) contracts are currently underway for the FRES system. Britain’s Ministry of Defense wrote that:

“The programme, which will last around 18 months, will define a scalable open architecture that may be a candidate electronic architecture solution at the core of the FRES fleet.”

In other words, it is possible that none of the presented electronic architecture solutions will be adopted. The challenging requirements may help to explain why.

The EA TDP solution must look at how FRES could be integrated within the MOD’s network enabled communications system providing enhanced Command and Control, Communications and Intelligence, local situational awareness via integrated sensors plus image and data handling, target acquisition and precision engagement, survivability and mobility. The Electronic Architecture must therefore integrate with the new General Dynamics UK-led BOWMAN communications system and the Bowman Combat Infrastructure and Platform Battlefield Information Systems Application (BCIP) program, providing seamless communications with all combat, combat support and combat service support systems. A sophisticated Health & Usage Monitoring System (HUMS) for the weapons systems is also envisioned, helping to reduce the logistical footprint, increase availability and ensure that the whole life cost for the FRES system is tightly controlled.

As if that wasn’t enough, mission-specific reconfiguration and the ability to grow the electronic system’s capabilities by incremental acquisition are also important target criteria.

Given the extent of these wished-for capabilities, it’s possible that re-prioritization of these electronics requirements will occur down the road.

On the physical side, advanced militaries are finding that their expensive systems need to be amortized over a long service life. In response, they’re beginning to plan for this. Meanwhile, demands for longer service life usually work to drive initial program costs even higher. The US Marines’ Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle (EFV) are looked at addressing this issue through steps like different hardware architectures, but the need to remain compliant with standard off-the-shelf commodity components became an issue. Given that long service life is likely to remain a budgetary necessity, more experiments are sure to follow.

With respect to vehicle design, the British Ministry of Defence notes:

“The FRES requirement sets demanding targets including limits to weight and size to allow rapid deployment by air, while at the same time calling for the delivery of military effect and survivability in excess of that currently available from vehicles of this class. FRES will also seek to minimise the logistic footprint and through life support costs.”

In other words, they want something that can be flown in by their C-130J-30 stretched Hercules transports, but it has to be able to survive mine/IED, artillery, RPG, missile, and 25-30mm cannon attacks more effectively than existing modern vehicles like the British Warrior light tank, the U.S. Stryker family, et. al. Oh, and they’d also like a hybrid powered vehicle, rather than diesel or gas.

This, too, is a very challenging set of capabilities to deliver.

Finally, there have been some comments re: having FRES vehicles replace the Challenger 2 main battle tanks when those go out of service. The lessons of urban warfare encounters from the Global War on Terror have made that something of a fantasy, barring some major technology breakthroughs in lightweight armor protection (ACAVP isn’t it yet, and may never be).

In the end, these capabilities proved too challenging to deliver. The weight limits were lifted, the vehicles’ role shifted back to medium armor, and the engine/drive systems are likely to be far more conventional.

Appendix 4 – FRES Experiments: Electronic Architecture TDPs

In Britain’s “Anti-US” Procurement Policies – and the Future Dynamics of Global Procurement, DID looked at one example of political blowback from European defense integration efforts, and highlighted the importance of C4SI platforms to procurement decisions. One of the authors we used as an example was Dr. Richard North, who wrote, inter alia, The end of independence: The implications of the “Future Rapid Effects System” for an independent UK defence policy. He believed that C$SI decisions were forcing Britain toward a European platform.

In September 2005, FRES Systems House integrator Atkins placed two Electronic Architecture Technology Demonstrator Programme (EA TDP) contracts with teams led by Lockheed Martin (UK) Ltd, and Thales UK, plus one contract for vehicle chassis design with General Dynamics UK. Amounts were not disclosed.

For the electronic architecture TDP, placing 2 concurrent contracts was pitched as a better way to address program risks across the huge range of technologies and potential solutions. This may or may not be so; what is clear is the priority being placed on this aspect of the FRES program.

Gary Balthrop is Lockheed Martin’s FRES program director. He leads a FRES EA TDP effort that also includes UK companies Ultra Electronics, Smiths Aerospace, SciSys, PA Consulting and Cranfield University (Team ISIS).

The Thales UK Team includes BAE Systems and QinetiQ, and will be based at the Thales UK site in Staines.

Thales UK proposes to demonstrate the EA by integrating it into a candidate vehicle chassis, and simulation techniques will be widely employed as well through the use of System Integration Laboratories (SIL). This use of simulation is expected to save both time and money and allow for more rigorous de-risking. The Thales UK Team will also be undertaking a competitive selection of suppliers for the sub-systems and work packages that comprise the EA TDP, providing industry opportunities but also introducing potential schedule issues.

At this point, the project is clearly in early stages and it’s difficult to make strong predictions re: the direction of technical compatibility beyond integration with General Dynamics UK-led BOWMAN. The U.S. JTRS program, whose software-defined electronics would allow fast reconfiguration and addition of any communications waveform, is currently in trouble and doesn’t exist as a strong bridging option.

What is clear is that Dr. North’s expressed fears were not realized, and corporations with very strong American ties are participating at all levels in the critical electronic architecture definition process. The overall competition, however, has swerved sharply for reasons that have little to do with electronics. It will be interesting to see what emerges.

Appendix 5 – FRES Experiments: Vehicle-Related TDPs

Meanwhile, the FRES Chassis Concept (CC) Technology Demonstration Program (TDP) is an 18-month effort to demonstrate the readiness of in-hub electric-drive engine, its ability to meet the FRES platform requirements, and the integration of a third party Electronic Architecture (EA) into the chassis. It’s also an opportunity for the teams to demonstrate their ability to work with SH Atkins, in order to help them meet both the program timeline and the information requirements for main gate go/no-go approval.

Hybrid power architectures are valued for a number of reasons. Lower fuel costs and fuel logistics loads, of course. The potential for lower lifetime maintenance via fewer moving parts, which could mean smaller spares inventories as well if reliability is good. Finally, there’s an important combat-related reason: stealth. While the U.S. Army’s new Stryker vehicle family doesn’t use hybrid engines, other modifications make them significantly quieter than the rival M113 or M2 Bradley APCs. As DID has reported, Stryker Brigade soldiers who served in Iraq considered this an important tactical advantage, and any armored vehicle with a hybrid engine and wheels or rubber band tracks would be quieter still. Indeed, some experimental projects report noise levels comparable to civilian vehicles. A hybrid engine would also reduce FRES’ thermal profile for infrared detection, no small benefit given the proliferaton of thermal sights on today’s battlefields.

The key question for the program to answer is whether the technology is sufficiently powerful and mature to be trusted in an armored vehicle of this size.

Notwithstanding Dr. Richard North’s contention that Rheinmetall DeTec was in the pole position, Atkins awarded the chassis concept project to General Dynamics UK Ltd., in partnership with General Dynamics Land Systems USA. Note that General Dynamics Land Systems was also selected by the USA’s Future Combat Systems (FCS) lead system integrators, forming an integrated design team with BAE Land Systems to create a similar class of FCS manned ground vehicles.

General Dynamics’ Advanced Hybrid Electric Drive (AHED) 8×8 vehicle will provide one baseline from which to evaluate the integration challenges and potential benefits of transformational technologies for the Future Rapid Effect System program. Its interchangeable modular in-hub electric drive, and hybrid power architecture, are intended to dramatically reduce the vehicles’ fuel logistics footprint. It is also hoped to reduce whole life cost of ownership, including costs associated with unique components, large repair part inventories, and training for both operators and maintenance personnel. The AHED vehicle already has over 4,200 km of road and cross-country testing, and General Dynamics intends to conduct over 4,500 km of additional reliability testing for the FRES CC TDP.

The General Dynamics UK FRES industry team comprises General Dynamics UK Limited (project lead), and General Dynamics Land Systems in Sterling Heights, MI, USA.

A second option was pursued via a January 2006 award to BAE Systems for its own chassis concept technology Demontration program (TDP). It will build on work done on the Swedish SEP program by BAE Hagglunds. SEP is a family of modular vehicles, utilizing emerging technologies like hybrid drives and allowing different role modules to be configured on either a wheeled or tracked chassis. The purpose of the TDP is to examine the ability of the electric drive system developed for SEP to meet the requirements of some or all of the envisaged FRES roles.

The BAE Systems Chassis TDP effort will be led from facilities in the UK in close co-operation with BAE Systems colleagues in Sweden, and will be focused primarily on reducing risk to allow a successful transition to the next phase.

BAE also received a “Gap Crossing” TDP for combat bridge-laying.

Additional Readings

Background: FRES Program

• British Army – Armoured Fighting Vehicles. Has sub-pages for the Combat and Reconnaissance vehicles FRES is slated to replace.
• General Dynamics UK – Armoured Fighting Vehicles (AFV). See also their Scout SV microsite, and note that Piranha IV manufacturer MOWAG is a General Dynamics subsidiary.
• Atkins (to July 2013) – FRES: News & Events. They maintained an archive of all FRES-related news releases from Atkins, The UK Ministry of Defence, and all companies involved in the project during the Initial Assessment Phase. Snapshot ends July 2007.

Background: Existing Platforms

• Wikipedia – Combat Vehicle Reconnaissance (Tracked). FRES-SV will partly replace these.
• Wikipedia – Warrior tracked armoured vehicle. FRES-SV will be complementary to the Warrior’s modernization program.
• General Dynamics UK – Bowman – Command Battlespace Management (Land) (CBM(L))

Background: FRES Competitors

FRES-SV

• Army Technology – ASCOD (Pizarro / Ulan) Tracked Armoured Fighting Vehicles, Spain. Base design for FRES-SV.
• Army Technology – CV90 Tracked Armoured Combat Vehicles, Sweden.
• Anthony G williams – Light AFV guns and the WFLIP and FRES Scout projects.

FRES-U

• ARTEC Boxer official site.
• Army Technology – Boxer MRAV Wheeled Multi-Role Armoured Vehicle, Europe
• Army Technology – Piranha V Wheeled 8×8 Utility Vehicle, United Kingdom. Picked as the winner, before FRES-UV was shelved.
• Army Technology – SEP Modular Armoured Tactical System Wheeled and Tracked Vehicles, Sweden.
• DID – Sweden Cancels SEP APC Program – But BAE Does Not. Initially, anyway. After losing in Britain and Sweden, it was eventually put aside.
• Army Technology – VBCI Wheeled Infantry Fighting Vehicle, France

News & Views

• UK Parliament (Jan 29/14) – Defence Committee – Ninth Report
  

• UK MoD (July 2013) – Transforming The British Army: An Update – July 2013. Refers to proposed Army 2020 changes. No apparent change to FRES’ future.
• UK MoD – Transforming The British Army, July 2012. Refers to proposed Army 2020 changes. Its initial outlines seem to envision a minor role for FRES, and a far smaller number of vehicles bought.
• CASR (November 2009) – The British Equivalent of the Close Combat Vehicle – FRES SV – Sees a Demonstrator Model Produced & Main Gun Type Chosen.
• UK Defence Committee (May 11/07) – The Army’s requirement for armoured vehicles: the FRES programme: update: Government Response to the Committee’s Seventh Report of Session 2006-07.
• Battlespace Magazine (July/Aug 2005) – FRES/Medium Force – It’s All In The Numbers. It notes that Britain’s wheeled Saxon APCs are the vehicles that must be replaced as soon as possible, but depending on FRES costs-per-vehicle the financial numbers could force interim solutions and/or additional life-extension programs for existing vehicles like the Warrior CVR (T) and FV 430 family. The article also makes note of ITAR and technology transfer issues with FRES.
• Jane’s Land Forces (Aug 27/03) – Future Rapid Effect System leads British forces’ transformation.

tag: fresvehicles, fresapc

In the 1970s, middle eastern wars demonstrated that tanks without infantry screens were vulnerable to infantry with anti-tank missiles. Unfortunately, armored personnel carriers were easy prey for enemy tanks, and sometimes had trouble just keeping up with friendly tanks like America’s 60+ ton, 50+ mph M1 Abrams. In response, the Americans rethought the armored personnel carrier, taking a page from the Soviet book. They created a more heavily armored, faster “Infantry Fighting Vehicle” named after WW2 General Omar “the soldier’s general” Bradley, and gave it an offensive punch of its own. M2/M3 tracked, armored IFVs can carry infantry – but they also have 25mm Bushmaster cannons, networked targeting sensors, and even TOW anti-armor or Stinger anti-aircraft missiles at their disposal.

Even well-serviced vehicles must suffer the pangs of age and wear, however, and the pace of electronics breakthroughs is far faster than the Army’s vehicle replacement cycle. The US Army plans to keep its Bradley fleet for some time to come, and new technologies have made it wise to upgrade part of that fleet while renewing the vehicles. Hence the remanufacture program, which complements the restore-only RESET programs.

This free-to-view DII Spotlight article explains the differences between the Bradley variants involved, details the re-manufacture process, offers additional research sources, and covers associated contracts from FY 1999 to the present.

Bradley Variants and Sub-Variants: A Quick Guide

Bradley Fighting Vehicles: Origins and History

Introduced in the 1980s during the Reagan defense build-up, the Bradleys were a departure from the usual mold of lightly armed Armored Personnel Carriers. They were heavily criticized for their expense, and accused of being both too heavy for rapid transport to crisis points and too lightly armored to hold their own against serious opposition. Even so, over 6,700 were produced. Most were for the US Army, but there was also a minor order on the side from the Saudis.

The Bradley IFV/CFV was finally thrust into battle during the 1991 Desert Storm campaign, where their combination of firepower, mobility, and protection made them a valuable asset, and largely laid the effectiveness controversies to rest. A widely upgraded fleet of Bradleys would reprise this role in Operation Iraqi Freedom, both during the deep in-country push that culminated in the “Thunder Run” into Baghdad, and during subsequent stabilization operations. The 2nd Battle of Fallujah also made heavy use of the Bradley, as documented in Staff Sgt. David Bellavia’s (retd.) excellent book “House to House: An Epic Memoir of War.”

Today, many other nations employ IFVs, from older Russian BMP/BRDMs to modernized and up-gunned M113 APCs, to more modern options like BAE’s popular CV90 family and Germany’s new Puma IFV from KMW & Rheinmetall.

The Bradleys’ high level of protection against anti-tank rockets has proven to be a significant plus, and operational readiness has reportedly exceeded 94%, during urban and cross-country missions that have covered more than 8 million miles. Its major weakness is a 175 gallon fuel tank in the belly, which is typically protected only by aluminum armor, and can become a source of severe burns during land mine attacks. Unfortunately, the Bradleys are not being redesigned to carry fuel externally as part of the remanufacture and upgrade process. Instead, a number of Bradleys are receiving improved mine-resistant belly armor as a stopgap measure, plus BFSS that use a new, lower, fuel cell bladder

Bradley Family Variants

Bradley vehicles carry a crew of 3 (commander, gunner and driver), plus additional soldiers in some variants. Overall, the Bradleys fulfills 5 critical mission roles for the US Army’s Heavy Brigade Combat Teams: infantry fighting vehicle – carries 6-7 troops (M2); cavalry fighting vehicle – carries 2 scouts (M3); fire support vehicle (A3 BFIST or M7 BFIST based on A2-ODS); battle command vehicle; and engineer squad vehicle (EBFV, or M2A2-ODS-E).

The M-A3s are the most modern variants of the Bradley, with fully digitized computing, navigation, and communications equipment. On-board subsystem monitoring, diagnostics/ prognostics, and segregated electrical power are included in this upgrade, as are improved NBC (nuclear, biological, chemical) protection and the addition of a 7th troop seat in the M2A3 variant. The A3 then adds enhanced sensors including IBAS 2nd generation FLIR (thermal imaging) with significantly greater range. Armor Magazine’s March 2005 issue relates this story from Iraq:

“Staff Sergeant Brian Flading, a 19D Operation Iraqi Freedom veteran, remembers an incident when his platoon was mortared one night in Balad. With the new FLIR, the crew was able to see the enemy shooting the mortars. His crew sent rounds downrange within three seconds of the mortar shot…”

The US Army plans to have more than 2,000 total Bradley A3s in its future fleet. Most of those vehicles will be converted to that standard through the remanufacture process.

M-A2-ODS vehicles lack the full electronics, sensor set, and future upgradeability of the M-A3s; instead, they have their own set of off-the-shelf improvements over the base M-A2s that duplicate many of the A3 variants’ essential capabilities, without the cost of a full A3 upgrade. Many remanufactured vehicles are being brought to the “Operation Desert Storm – Situational Awareness” standard, from the base A2 or A2-ODS.

Navigation that allows ODS vehicles to maneuver with more modern variants is provided by the addition of PGS/POSNAV. For ODS – Situational Awareness vehicles, the new laser range-finder is integrated into both the new GPS system, and new FBCB2 (aka. “Blue Force Tracker”) equipment, significantly improving their ability to designate and hand off targets. Survivability gets a boost via the integration of Battlefield Combat Identification System and a Missile Countermeasure device, as well as applique reactive armor from the General Dynamics-RAFAEL partnership. Bench seats help the crew mount up and dismount faster. Finally, a 7th seat has been added to the ODS to support the 3×9 Mechanized Infantry Platoon organization.

M6 Linebacker. This variant carried Stinger missiles and related sensors to serve as mobile short-range air defense for US armored formations, but for good or ill most Linebackers have been converted into M2A2-ODS vehicles under a February 2005 contract.

The M7 BFIST (Bradley FIre Support Team) is a variant of the M2A2-ODS Bradley. It is used as an artillery forward observer vehicle and laser designator, providing major improvements in first-round artillery accuracy on a platform whose mobility and survivability is the same as the armored maneuver units it rides in. BFIST’s performance during Operation Iraqi Freedom was reported to be impressive. The M7’s successor is simply referred to as the Bradley A3 FIST or A3 BFIST, and incorporates all Bradley M-A3 features in addition to its suite of advanced targeting sensors and electronics.

Beyond the listed variants, the Bradley Urban Survivability Kit (BUSK) III offers a useful set of bolt-on improvements: an Emergency Ramp Release (ERR) to get out of battle damaged vehicles; Bradley Fuel Cell Survivability (BFSS) which increases protection against land mine blasts by using a new, lower, fuel cell bladder; Bradley Advanced Survivability Seats-Driver (BASS-D) energy absorbing seats and foot rests; and a Turret Advanced Survivability System (TASS) that adds floor plates and energy-absorbing foot rests for the gunner and commander.

Bradley Remanufacture Program: Details & Contracts

BAE Systems works through its Public Private Partnership with Red River Army Depot (RRAD) in Texas to remanufacture and upgrade these vehicles. Initial disassembly and subsystem rebuild is performed at RRAD. Further disassembly and structural modifications is performed by BAE Systems in Fayette County, PA, with some work done in Aiken, SC. Final assembly, integration and test is conducted at the BAE Systems facility in York, PA.

Unlike RESET programs, designed to replace all defective or worn parts and restore/service a vehicle back to pre-combat condition, remanufacture is a complete rebuild designed to return it to full “zero miles” condition, and install upgrades.

Unless otherwise specified, the U.S. Army Tank-Automotive and Armaments Command in Warren, MI manages the contract, and BAE Land Systems and Armaments is the recipient.

FY 2018

June 18/18: 473 new units The US Army is tapping BAE Systems Land & Armaments in support of its Infantry Fighting Vehicles (IFVs). The $347 million fixed-price-incentive-fee contract sees for the production of up to 473 Bradley M2A4 and M7A4 vehicles, and for the procurement of authorized stockage list spares, and additional packages for legacy component repair. Introduced in the 1980s during the Reagan defense build-up, the Bradleys were a departure from the usual mold of lightly armed Armored Personnel Carriers. During Desert Storm the vehicles combination of firepower, mobility, and protection made them a valuable asset. The Bradleys’ high level of protection against anti-tank rockets has proven to be a significant plus, and operational readiness has reportedly exceeded 94%, during urban and cross-country missions that have covered more than 8 million miles. Work will be performed in York, Pennsylvania, with an estimated completion date of June 2019.

FY 2017

July 19/17: The US Army has awarded LOC Performance a $49.1 million contract modification to an existing order for Bradley Fighting Vehicle modification kits and installation. Under the terms of the deal, LOC will produce and supply 276 additional Bradley Engineering Change Proposal 1 kits and two sets of spare parts, which will be used to upgrade Bradley Fighting Vehicles weight-bearing systems and underbelly armor. Work will be conducted at Plymouth, Minn. with a completion date scheduled for April 30, 2019. The Engineering Change Proposal 1 installs heavy load-bearing tracks, torsion bars to restore ground clearance and improved underbelly armor on the Bradleys. This in turn improves the vehicle’s capability to handle the stress placed on its chassis caused by the installation of armor upgrades and Bradley Urban Survivability Kits.

March 21/13: CAV – IFV. BAE Systems Land & Armament LP, York, PA receives a $16.6 million firm-fixed-price contract modification to convert Bradley Reset Vehicles from M3A3 to M2A3 configuration. In other words, to change them from cavalry scout vehicles with a crew and 2 scouts, to infantry fighting vehicles that carry their crew + 7 soldiers.

Work will be performed in York, PA; Lemont Furnace, PA; and Aiken, SC; with an estimated completion date of Aug 29/14. One bid was solicited, with one bid received by Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI (W56HZV-10-G-0003).

Aug 14/12: +353 various. BAE Systems in York, PA receives a $306.2 million firm-fixed-price contract modification to upgrade 353 Operation Desert Storm M2A2, M3A2 and M7 Bradley Fire Support Team vehicles to Operation Desert Storm Situational Awareness (ODS-SA) configurations. This production contract is the flip side of $340 million in funding to purchase upgrade materials, bringing the full contract total for the 353 vehicles to $646 million.

Work will begin in August 2012, with final delivery expected in April 2014, but the contract runs until May 30/14. The upgraded Bradleys will be provided to the Minnesota and Pennsylvania National Guard units, and to Combined Armed Battalions in the Kansas, South Carolina and Ohio National Guard units (W56HZV-10-G-0003). See also BAE Systems.

May 10/12: A $68.7 million cost-reimbursement, no-fee contract modification to reset, and if necessary to convert, Bradley ODS vehicles to the ODS-SA standard. Subsequent conversations with BAE personnel reveal that it did not avert the planned furlough (vid. May 2/12 entry), and was just additional funding for parts due to delays in getting the main contract award. That award came through in August 2012.

Work will be performed in York, PA, with an estimated completion date of May 31/14. One bid was solicited, with one bid received (W56HZV-10-G-0003).

May 6/12: A $31.6 million firm-fixed-price contract modification will supply material and labor for Bradley ODS (Operation Desert Storm) vehicle conversions. This would appear to be the installation and labor bookend to the Dec 7/11 contract.

Work will be performed in York, PA, with an estimated completion date of Oct 31/12. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received (W56HZV-10-G-0003).

Dec 7/11: BAE US Combat Systems in York, PA receives a $30.4 million cost-no-fee and firm-fixed-price contract, to buy materials for 247 Bradley ODS-SA vehicles. It looks like this boosts the Oct 5/11 contract.

Work will be performed in York, PA with an estimated completion date of Oct 31/12. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received by the US Army’s Contracting Command in Warren, MI (W56HZV-10-G-0003).

Oct 5/11: +245 ODS. A $270.8 million cost-no-fee contract will buy the materials and equipment needed to bring 245 Bradleys to the Operational Desert Storm Situational Awareness (ODS-SA) standard. Work will be performed in York, PA, with an estimated completion date of Dec 30/13. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received (W56HZV-10-G-0003).

Aug 25/11: BUSK. BAE Systems in York, PA receives a $23.8 million firm-fixed-price contract for Bradley Urban Survivability Kits. Work will be performed in York, PA, with an estimated completion date of March 9/12. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received (W56HZV-10-G-0003)

April 25/11: BUSK. BAE Systems receives a $53.3 million contract to provide 3,034 Bradley Urban Survivability Kits III to outfit the Bradley Fighting Vehicles to the BUSK III configuration.

Work will be performed in York, PA with an estimated completion date of June 30/11. One bid was solicited with 1 bid received by the Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI (W56HZV-05-D-0005).

March 22/11: Components. A $47.7 million cost-reimbursement, no-fee contract for M2A2 ODS-SA(Operation Desert Storm – Situational Awareness) components, to be used to convert Bradley Fighting Vehicles. Work will be performed in York, PA, with an estimated completion date of Oct 31/12. One bid was solicited with one bid received (W56HZV-10-G-0003).

Nov 9/10: long-lead. A $250.1 million cost reimbursement – no fee contract. It covers long lead time materials to make up 247 M2/M3 Bradley Operation Desert Storm Situational Awareness (ODS-SA) conversion kits, with 202 used under the contract to convert vehicles from Bradley ODS to ODS-SA configurations, and the other 45 kept for future requirements. The main buy of ODS-SA kits and conversions is expected in April 2011.

Work is to be performed in York, PA, with an estimated contract completion date of Feb 28/12, but BAE Systems places the end of production work at September 2012. One bid was solicited with one bid received (W56HZV-10-G-0003). See also BAE release.

April 1/10: Sub-contractors. L-3 Communications Combat Propulsion Systems in Muskegon, MI received a $16.1 million firm-price with incentive and cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for 221 remanufactured Bradley transmissions, 2 control tests and incentive fee pool. Work is to be performed in Muskegon, MI (54%), and Texarkana, TX (46%) with an estimated completion date of Dec 31/13. For the order, 1 bid was solicited with 1 bid received by the US Army TACOM Contracting Center in Warren, MI (W56HZV-09-C-0098).

Sept 23/09: Sub-contractors. L-3 Communications Combat Propulsion Systems in Muskegon, MI received a $33.1 million firm-fixed-price with Incentive and cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for 94 remanufactured Bradley transmissions and parts, 20 new Bradley transmissions, 87 repaired Bradley transmissions, 979 parts kits to rebuild Bradley transmissions, 20,000 hours of system technical support, and $5.2 million in management support.

Work is to be performed in Texarkana, TX (43%), Muskegon, MI (42%) and Huddersfield, UK (15%) with an estimated completion date of Dec 30/11. One bid solicited with one bid received by the U.S. Army TACOM LCMC in Warren, MI (W56HZV-09-C-0098).

April 6/09: Sub-contractors. Raytheon Network-Centric Systems in McKinney, TX announces $163.5 million worth of contracts from BAE for 822 advanced thermal sighting systems: a $123 million order for 620 Commander’s Independent Viewer block 1 units on Feb 20/09, and a $40.5 million award for 202 units on Feb 26/09. The systems will be installed on Bradley M-A3 vehicles.

Raytheon’s CIV is a 2nd-generation infrared vision system that provides the commander with a 360-degree battlefield view. It complements sub-systems like DRS’ IBAS (Improved Bradley Acquisition System), and has the same extended-range capabilities. By providing the commander and gunner with independent sights, it allows the vehicle to operate in “hunter-killer” mode, with the gunner engaging one target while the commander surveys the situation and queues up the next victim.

Sept 22/08: +326 various. BAE announces a a $742 million U.S. Army contract to remanufacture and upgrade 326 Bradley vehicles. The award exercises an option in the contract announced on July 8/08, and brings the total value of BAE Systems’ 2008 Bradley remanufacturing contracts to $1.3 billion for 578 vehicles.

Under this award, BAE Systems will remanufacture another 189 M2A3 IFVs (51 of which which will covert to M3A3 cavalry vehicles), 115 M3A3 cavalry vehicles, and 22 M3A3 Bradley Fire Support Team (BFIST) vehicles.

These Bradley vehicles will be equipped with improved armor designed to resist land mine attacks, Bradley Urban Survivability Kits, and several engineering changes designed to increase soldier survivability. The company will also provide more than 200 different types of spare parts in varying quantities. Work under the contract will begin immediately by the existing workforce, with deliveries ending in February 2011.

July 8/08: +252. BAE announces a $538 million U.S. Army contract to remanufacture 252 Bradley vehicles: 160 M2A3 vehicles, 60 M3A3 cavalry vehicles and 32 M3A3 Bradley Fire Support Team (BFIST) vehicles in conjunction with the Red River Army Depot. The company will also provide 200 different types of spare parts, in varying quantities.

Work under the contract will begin immediately, with deliveries ending in June 2010.

Sept 15/08: IED kits. BAE Systems announces an $11 million contract from the U.S. Army to purchase and install Improvised Explosive Device (IED) Mine Armor Kits on 433 Bradley Combat Systems vehicles. This award also includes the installation work for 116 kits previously purchased under this contract. When combined with previous awards, this modification brings the total contract value to $96 million for Bradley IED Mine Armor Kits.

Work under the contract will be conducted at various field installation sites with deliveries scheduled from December 2008 through March 2009.

March 31/08: Sub-contractors. L-3 Communications Corp. received a $20.8 million firm-fixed price contract for remanufactured Bradley Fighting Vehicle Systems transmissions. Work will be performed in Muskegon, MI and is expected to be complete by Aug 4/09. Web bids were solicited on Oct 17/07, and 1 bid was received by U.S. Army TACOM Life Cycle Management Command in Warren, MI (W56HZV-08-C-0119).

July 23/07: +172 various. BAE announces a pair of contract modifications from the U.S. Army TACOM Life Cycle Management Command, totaling $411.7 million.

Under the first contract, BAE Systems will upgrade 172 Bradleys to the A3 baseline: 108 M2A2 Infantry Fighting Vehicles, 60 M3A2 Cavalry Fighting Vehicles and 4 M7 FIST Fire Support Team Vehicles. The second contract calls for BAE Systems to provide spare parts for Bradley A3 Combat Systems. Deliveries for both contracts are scheduled to begin in October 2009, and continue through February 2010.

These contracts, when combined with the $1.16 billion contract awarded in November 2006 for the remanufacture and upgrade of 610 Bradley Combat Systems, bring the total value of BAE Systems Bradley work to $3.9 billion for Fiscal Years 2005 – 2007. BAE Systems release.

Feb 14/07: +8 A3. The full delivery order amount of $16 million as part of a firm-fixed-price contract for the remanufacture and upgrade of 8 Vehicles to M2A3 standard, and return to 0 Mile Condition. Work will be performed in York, PA (60%), Fayette, PA (8%), Santa Clara, CA (28%), and Aiken, SC (4%), and is expected to be complete by May 31, 2009. This was a sole source contract initiated on Feb. 10, 2006 (W56HZV-05-G-0005). See also BAE Systems release.

Nov 27/06: +490 various. BAE Systems in York, PA receives the full delivery order amount of $1.01 billion as part of a firm-fixed-price contract to remanufacture of 490 total Bradleys into M2A3 Infantry Fighting Vehicle, M3A3 Cavalry Fighting Vehicle scouts, and A3 BFIST targeting and fire control vehicle configurations. Work will begin immediately, and will be performed in York, PA (60%), Fayette, PA (8%), Santa Clara, CA (28%), and Aiken, SC (4%). Deliveries are scheduled to begin in April 2008, and the contract is expected to be complete by May 31, 2009. This was a sole source contract initiated on Feb. 10, 2006 (W56HZV-05-G-0005).

Nov 27/06: +120 ODS. BAE Systems in York, PA receives the full delivery order amount of $118.7 million as part of a firm-fixed-price contract to remanufacture 120 total Bradleys to M2A2-ODS and M3A2-ODS configurations. Work will begin immediately, and will be performed in York, PA (60%), Fayette, PA (8%), Santa Clara, CA (28%), and Aiken, SC (4%), and is expected to be complete by May 31, 2009. Deliveries are scheduled to begin in April 2008, and the contract is expected to be complete by May 31, 2009. This was a sole source contract initiated on Feb. 10, 2006 (W56HZV-05-G-0005). See BAE release re: its Nov 27/06 contracts.

July 28/06: +96 various. The 2 orders announced on this day included full delivery order amounts of $192.6 million and $30.9 million [TL.= $223.5 million] as part of a firm-fixed-price contract for FY 2006 remanufacture and upgrade of Bradley vehicles. Work will be performed in York, PA (83%), Aiken, SC (5%), San Jose, CA (8%), and Fayette, PA (4%), and is expected to be complete by Dec. 31, 2008. This will be performed under a sole source contract initiated on May 17, 2006 (W56HZV-05-G-0005).

BAE Systems, in partnership with Red River Army Depot (RRAD), will remanufacture and upgrade a total of 96 vehicles whose final configurations will be: 57 Bradley A3 vehicles in infantry (M2A3) and cavalry (M3A3) configurations, 16 Bradley A3 Fire Support Team (FIST) vehicles, and 23 M7 BFIST vehicles based on the M2A2-ODS. See also BAE’s release.

June 27/05: +533. See BAE’s June 27, 2005 release covering all of the remanufacturing work announced on DefenseLINK June 23, 2005. DID also covered this set. Over $1.1 billion worth of contracts encompassed:

• 450 older Bradleys remanufactured to Bradley A3 status – the total value of this delivery order also incorporates 55 vehicles and $71.5 million awarded in March, 2005.
• 50 vehicles remanufactured to Bradley A2-ODS status, plus kits to convert 100 more vehicles to the A2-ODS configuration.
• 33 vehicles remanufactured to Bradley Fire Support Team (BFIST) vehicles
• Spares for Bradley A3 vehicles (not noted below, as not part of the remanufacture program)
• BAE Systems will also provide 120 Commander’s Independent Viewers for 120 Bradley vehicles ordered under a contract modification.

June 23/05: A3. United Defense LP (now part of BAE Systems) in York, PA receives a delivery order amount of $896.4 million as part of a $967.9 million firm-fixed-price contract for the remanufacture of Bradley A3 vehicles. Work will be performed in York, PA (83%), San Jose, CA (8%), Aiken, SC (5%), and Fayette, PA (4%), and is expected to be complete by Jan. 31, 2008. This was a sole source contract initiated on March 1, 2005 (W56HZV-05-G-0005).

June 23/05: ODS. United Defense LP (now part of BAE Systems) in York, PA receives the full delivery order amount of $78.4 million as part of a firm-fixed-price contract for the remanufacture of M-A2 Operation Desert Storm vehicles and conversion kits. Work will be performed in York, PA (83%), San Jose, CA (8%), Aiken, SC (5%), and Fayette, PA (4%), and is expected to be complete by Jan. 31, 2008. This was a sole source contract initiated on March 1, 2005 (W56HZV-05-G-0005).

June 23/05: M7 BFIST. United Defense LP (now part of BAE Systems) in York, PA receives the full delivery order amount of $31.4 million as part of a firm-fixed-price contract for the remanufacture of M7 Bradley Fire Support Team Vehicles. Work will be performed in York, PA (83%), San Jose, CA (8%), Aiken, SC (5%), and Fayette, PA (4%), and is expected to be complete by Jan. 31, 2008. This was a sole source contract initiated on March 1, 2005 (W56HZV-05-G-0005).

June 23/05: Components. United Defense LP (now part of BAE Systems) in York, PA receives a $30.6 million modification to a firm-fixed-price contract for the commander’s independent viewers. Work will be performed in York, PA (83%), San Jose, CA (8%), Aiken, SC (5%), and Fayette, PA (4%), and is expected to be complete by Jan. 31, 2008. This was a sole source contract initiated on March 1, 2005 (DAAE07-01-C-M016).

Sept 24/99: +53. United Defense LP (now part of BAE Systems) in York, PA receives a $43.8 million modification to cost-plus-fixed-fee contract DAAE07-96-C-X036, to acquire the effort necessary to remanufacture/ convert 53 Bradley Fighting Vehicles from an M3A0 configuration to an M3A2-ODS configuration. Work will be performed in York, PA and is expected to be complete by Nov. 30, 2001.

Dec 21/98: +70. United Defense LP (now part of BAE Systems) in York, PA receives a $114.6 million modification to a firm-fixed-price contract for the remanufacture of 27 M2A2 vehicles to the upgraded M2A3 configuration, remanufacture of 43 M3A2 vehicles to the upgraded M3A3 configuration, and the purchase of material/support for 3 M2A3 vehicles (the price for an option to build these three vehicles is not included in this contract action). Work will be performed in York, PA and is expected to be complete by March 31, 2001. This is a sole source contract initiated on Jan. 30, 1998 (DAAE07-96-C-X036).

Additional Readings & Sources

• Army Technology – Bradley M2 / M3 Tracked Armoured Fighting Vehicles, USA
• GlobalSecurity.org – M2 and M3 Bradley Fighting Vehicle Systems (BFVS)
• Association of the United States Army, Army Magazine (June 2005 – DEAD LINK) – Bradley A3. Good overview of the Bradley modernization program. See this 2012 document from PEO GCS [PDF] instead.
• BAE Systems – Command and Control Vehicle (C2V), M4. Via Wayback.
• Army Technology – Bradley Linebacker Short Range Air Defense Vehicle, USA
• BAE Systems – Bradley Fire Support Vehicle, M7. Via Wayback.
• Association of the United States Army, Army Magazine (July 2002) – M7 Bradley Fire Support Team Vehicle
• Ft. Sill, OK – Fire Support Branch (re: M7 Bradley BFIST). Via Wayback.
• Defense News (Sept 23/13) – Industry Pushes Back Against Army Report. “BAE Systems CEO Linda Hudson, the heads of 40 suppliers that help sustain the company’s Bradley Fighting Vehicle program and several labor unions penned a highly critical letter to Army Secretary John McHugh on Sept. 19…”
• Breaking Defense (March 14/13) – BAE Storms Hill For Bradley Funding To Keep Penn. Plant Alive.
• Lt. Col. James L. Miller, Field Artillery Magazine (Sept-Oct 2002) – How to Develop the Best-Ever Fire Support System [PDF]. Good explanation re: the doctrinal, training, and support elements that go into this effort. See also his maintenance notes re: the M7 Bradley BFIST.

America’s M1 Abrams tanks come in a number of versions. In addition to the M1A1 that is now standard, the US Army is beginning to field its M1 TUSK for urban warfare. It also operates the M1A2 System Enhancement Program (SEP), currently the most advanced standard variant.

This Spotlight article covers the M1A2 Abrams SEP upgrade program, and will be updated and backfilled as new contracts are issued and key events take place.

M1A2 SEP: Additional Background

The M1A2 SEP is builds on the digitized M1A2 platform with an improved armor package of third generation steel-encased depleted uranium armor, a new command and control system, second-generation FLIR thermal sights that include a Commander’s Independent Thermal Viewer (CITV) for “hunter-killer” operation, the Under Armor Auxiliary Power Unit (UAAPU) that lets crews run key electronics without running the engine, and a Thermal Management System (TMS – i.e. air conditioning for crew & electronics). The M1A2 SEP also features enhanced electronics like color maps and displays, improved networked communications, high-density computer memory and increased microprocessing speed, a more user friendly “Soldier Machine Interface (SMI)”, and an open operating computing system that will make future upgrades and additions easier.

The M1A2 SEP’s advanced FLIR/thermal sights are part of the US Army’s Horizontal Technology Integration (HTI) Second Generation Forward Looking Infrared (HTI SGF) sighting systems program, which creates commonality with other vehicles like the M2/M3 Bradley IFVs.

The M1A2 SEP is a formidable upgrade package, but it was missing a small but crucial item. Troops in Iraq and elsewhere are also clamoring for a phone on the outside of the tank that will let them talk to the vehicle crew. This was common as far back as World War 2, and its lack is hampering coordination on the modern battlefield – especially in urban areas. A General Dynamics representative noted that future M1A2 Abrams TUSK (Tank Urban Survivability Kit) vehicles will have this feature, but the SEP v1 tanks did not.

M1A2 SEP Version 2 configuration, which is just beginning to appear, fixes this. It adds improved displays, sights, and power systems compared to earlier SEP versions – plus the tank-infantry phone. Recent orders also added a CROWS-II top-mounted machine gun with advanced sights. The CROWS system can be controlled from inside the tank using a joystick and screen, removing the need to open the hatch and expose the crews to snipers. SEPv2 is the most technologically advanced digital Abrams tank, and is also positioned for future communications and other technology updates.

Recent budgets for M1A1 enhancements, including both M1A1-Situational Awareness and M1A2 tanks, include:

• FY 2010: $278.8 million for 22 tanks ($93.8M RDT&E, $185.0M procurement)
  
• FY 2011: $294.4 million for 21 tanks ($93.6M RDT&E, $182.0M procurement, $18.8M spares)
  
• FY 2012: $583.9 million for 63 tanks ($9.3M RDT&E, $567.4M procurement, $7.2M spares)
  
• FY 2013 Request: $300.8 million, ($97.3M RDT&E, $203.5M procurement) meant to “complete the final [SEP] production, fielding, and training” – 20-24 tanks by some reports.
  
• FY 2014 Request: $297.4 million ($101.3M RDT&E, $178.1M procurement).

M1A2 SEP: Related Contracts

The Armor Site notes that:

“A multi-year contract for 307 M1A2 Abrams Systems Enhancement Program (SEP) tanks was awarded in March 2001 with production into 2004. The current Army plan allows for a fleet of 588 M1A2 SEP, 586 M1A2 and 4,393 M1A1 tanks. The potential exits for a retrofit program of 129 M1A2 tanks to the SEP configuration between 2004 and 2005… The US Army decided to cancel future production of the M1A2 SEP from FY2004, but in June 2005 ordered the upgraded of a further 60 M1A2 tanks to SEP configuration.”

That program has now grown very substantially, and a 2007 contract added 435 more more M1A2 SEPs. Orders have continued to come in, and General Dynamics says that the current multi-year award set will complete the modernization of all M1 tanks in the active-duty army to M1A2 SEP standard. By 2014, however, their interest in keeping the facility running led supportive members of Congress to continue spending money on the program, over the Army’s objections.

Unless otherwise specified, all contracts are awarded by The U.S. Army Tank-Automotive and Armaments Command (TACOM) in Warren, MI; and the recipient is General Dynamics Land Systems in Sterling Heights, MI.

December 4/17: Contracts-Additional Order Norway’s Kongsberg has been selected by the US Army to deliver additional enhancements and upgrades on the service’s M1A2 Abrams Main Battle Tank. The $3.9 million award, which dates back to an earlier August 2012 contract between the firm and the US Department of Defense (DoD), calls for additional deliveries of the Protector Low Profile Common Remote Operated Weapon Station (CROWS) System, as well as spare parts for sustainment. The Protector RWS allows for greater protector of US military troops and commanders by allowing them to fire and engage enemy targets from inside the Abrams tank, as opposed to exposing themselves while operating small- to medium-caliber weapon systems mounted on the outside of the vehicle.

October 12/17: The first six initial production vehicles of the M1A2 Abrams Main Battle Tank System Enhancement Package Version 3 (SEPv3) has been rolled out for the first time after delivery to the US Army. Production for the M1A2 SEPv3 is being conducted at the Joint Systems Manufacturing Center (JSMC) in Lima, Ohio and at the Anniston Army Depot in Anniston, Alabama. Improvements added to the new tanks include a joint tactical radio system that integrates handheld, manpack, and small-form fit radios to maintain battle command and communications interoperability with future brigade combat teams. It also comes with an improved power generation and distribution equipment, as well as counter remote control improvised explosive device electronic warfare/Duke V3 equipment. An ammunition data link for programing the M829A4 advanced kinetic energy and advanced multi-purpose rounds has also been added, as well as a quiet auxiliary power unit to operate on-board systems during silent watch operations, and armor upgrades. Over time, the SEPv3s will replace the M1A2 SEPv2, which have been in production since 2005.

September 07/17: General Dynamics Land Systems has won two US Department of Defense (DoD) contracts for the upgrade of M1A2 series of main battle tanks for the US Army. The first contract, valued at $311 million, calls for the firm to upgrade seven Abrams tanks from the M1A2 System Enhancement Package 3 into a SEPv4 variant. Upgrades included in the SEPv4 package include an improved Commander and Gunner’s Primary Sights, thermal systems, and other enhancements to the tank’s armor and mobility. The second deal, estimated to be worth $270 million, will see production of 45 Abrams SEPv3 tanksto the US Army, with production starting this fall.

August 30/17: The US Army has awarded General Dynamics Land Systems a $310 million contract for engineering changes to the M1A2 Abrams tank System Enhancement Package Version 3. Work to be undertaken include the design, development and integration for the upgrades to the M1A2, with a projected completion date scheduled for Feb. 28, 2024. The M1A2 SEP 3 are upgraded versions of the M1A2 Abrams tank, and feature improved power generation, networking capabilities and have a lower-profile Common Remotely Operated Weapons Station (CROWS) system for its top-mounted .50mm machine gun.

August 03/17: General Dynamics Land Systems has been awarded a $270.2 million contract to provide System Enhancement Package (SEP) components for upgraded US Army M1A2 SEPv2 and SEPv3 Abrams main battle tanks. According to the work order, GD will provide, install, and integrate System Enhancement Package v2 legacy components for 45 M1A2 SEPv3 tanks and 60 additional sets of SEPv2 and SEPv3 parts, as well as providing tooling, test, and support equipment. Work will be carried out primarily at Lima Army Tank Plant in Ohio, and other sites in the United States, and is scheduled to run until Aug. 21, 2019. The SEPv2 includes upgraded computers, improved front and side armor, a improved transmission, new infrared sensors and a Common Remotely Operated Weapons Station (CROWS) for the .50 machine gun. While the SEPv3 has improved power generation, networking capabilities and possesses a lower-profile CROWS system.

December 15/16: The US State Department signed off on a $1.7 billion foreign military sale with Kuwait for the recapitalization of 218 of the kingdom’s M1A2 tanks. Work included in the deal involves the supply of 240 M2A1 machine guns; 480 7.62 M240 machine guns; 240 AN/VRC-92E SINCGARS radios; 1,085 night vision goggles; technical support; and training services. A number of defense contractors will be included in the program, with General Dynamics, Raytheon, Meggitt, Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin and Honeywell, all involved.

Jan 31/14: +12. A $72.7 million firm-fixed-price contract for 12 M1A2 SEPv2 tanks.

$15.7 million in FY 2013 funds are committed immediately. other procurement funds in the amount of $15,712,969 were obligated at the time of the award. Work will be performed in Lima, OH; Scranton, PA; Anniston, ALA; and Tallahassee, FL; and will run until Dec 31/15. One bid was solicited with one received. With Israel’s Namer heavy IFV order facing significant cuts, any production at Lima surely be welcomed (W56HZV-14-C-0054).

April 29/13: Keep spending. Congress is looking to spend funds over and above the Pentagon’s request, in order to keep General Dynamics Land Systems running at a higher rate. The Lima plant is reportedly producing about 5 M1A2S upgrade kits per month for Saudi Arabia, and 4 M1A1M kits per month for Egypt, plus production of Israeli Namer ultra-heavy Infantry Fighting Vehicles. Of the Army’s 2,400 tanks, about 1,500 – 1,600 have reportedly received the $7.5 million MA2SEPv2 upgrade. The US Army had wanted to stop buying tanks until 2017, using funds for R&D to produce an updated M1 variant.

Congress has other ideas, and $468 million is a consistently-used figure for the extra spending, but that isn’t broken down clearly. What is clear is that the US Army has said it doesn’t want or need more M1A2s, and wants to spend the money elsewhere at a time when its reducing training and maintenance. Congress disagrees for a combination of industrial reasons involving the restart costs of drying up the sub-contractor chain (and killing some of their firms), and political reasons involving jobs in a state with powerful representatives and outsize significance in Presidential politics. AP | CS Monitor.

April 10/13: FY 2014 Budget. The President releases a proposed budget at last, the latest in modern memory. The Senate and House were already working on budgets in his absence, but the Pentagon’s submission is actually important to proceedings going forward. See ongoing DID coverage. With respect to the M1 fleet, the budget would spend $279.4 million ($101.3M RDT&E, $178.1M procurement) to:

“…maintain the armor facility at a sustainable level and minimize loss of skilled labor. It also procures numerous approved modifications to fielded M1A2 Abrams tanks, including the Data Distribution Unit (DDU) to enable network interoperability, the Vehicle Health Management System (VHMS), loader tray modification to improve safety and the Commander’s Remote Operating Weapon Station (CROWS).”

April 25/12: General Dynamics Land Systems in Sterling Heights, MI wins a $31.1 million firm-fixed-price contract to create 46 Abrams M1A2 SEPv2 vehicles from existing stocks, by installing the upgrade kits.

Work will be performed in Lima, OH; Scranton, PA; Anniston, AL; and Tallahassee, FL, with an estimated completion date of Nov 30/14. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received (W56HZV-12-C-0198).

Dec 23/11: +21. A $59.9 million firm-fixed-price contract modification to buy Abrams M1A2 System Enhancement Packages and CROWS weapon stations. Based on past contracts, this will cover 21 M1A2 SEPv2 kits, and finish funding for the planned 435 tanks under the program, though an installation contract may still be forthcoming.

Work will be performed in Lima, OH; Tallahassee, FL; Anniston, AL; Scranton, PA; and Sterling Heights, MI, with an estimated completion date of June 30/13. One bid was solicited, with one bid received (W56HZV-06-G-0006).

March 1/11: A $59.1 million firm-fixed-price contract for up to 21 Abrams M1A2 SEPv2 upgrade tanks. That means full materials and labor for the upgrades.

Work will be performed in Lima, OH; Tallahassee, FL; Anniston, AL; Scranton, PA; and Sterling Heights, MI, with an estimated completion date of June 30/13. One bid was solicited with one bid received (W56HZV-06-G-0006).

March 5/10: +22. A $62.1 million firm-fixed-price contract covers Program Year 4, Increment 2 of the Abrams multi-year contract. The Army is buying full materials and labor for 22 M1A2 SEPv2 upgrades.

General Dynamics Land Systems says that before this recent “call-up” of 22 kits, 371 of the 435 total vehicles had been funded. Now, only 42 vehicles require funding, and they expected to be taken care of in the next 2 increments around January 2011 and 2012. These “funding years” are different from “program years”, and PY 4 is expected to cover 39 M1A2 SEPv2s.

Work is to be performed in Lima, OH (75%); Tallahassee, FL (10%); Anniston, AL (9%); Scranton, PA (3%); and Sterling Heights, MI (3%), with an estimated completion date of Nov 30/12. TACOM in Warren, MI issued the contract (W56HZV-06-G-0006).

Sept 14/09: CROWS. An $18.2 million unfinalized Change Order Modification firm-fixed-price multi-year contract to buy up to 370 Commanders Remote Operated Weapons Stations version 2 kits (CROWS II) for M1A2 SEPv2 upgrade vehicles. Work is to be performed in Lima, OH with an estimated completion date of Aug 31/12 (W56HZV-06-G-0006).

March 2/09: A $9.8 million firm-fixed-price, firm fixed price level of effort, cost plus fixed fee contract to provide parts for the reset material necessary to allow Anniston Army Depot (ANAD) to reset 5 Battle Damaged M1 SEPv1 tanks to a SEPv2 configuration, with a 100% option to RESET another 5.

Work is to be performed at Sterling Heights, MI, with an estimated completion date of Aug 31/10 (W56HZV-06-G-0006).

Feb 24/09: A $32 million firm-fixed-price contract change order issued to RESET 129 of the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment’s Abrams SEPv2 tanks.

Work is to be performed at Lima, Ohio, (75%), Tallahassee, FL (10%), Anniston, AL (9%), Scranton, PA (3%), and Sterling Heights, MI (3%), with an estimated completion date of Sept 30/10. One bid was solicited and one bid received (W56HZV-06-G-0006).

Feb 3/09: A $5.9 million firm fixed price contract change order to buy improved ammunition racks, as part of a RESET program for 90 M1A2 SEPv1 tanks that are being upgraded to SEPv2.

Work is to be performed at Lima, OH (75%), Tallahassee, FL (10%), Anniston, AL (9%), Scranton, PA (3%), and Sterling Heights, MI (3%), with an estimated completion date of Sept 30/10 (W56HZV-06-C-0006).

Jan 27/09: +24. An $80.7 million firm-fixed-price contract for the Abrams Multi-Year Contract’s program year 2, increment 2. This contract buys 24 M1A2 SEPv2 upgrades, and funds 6 more tanks in program year 3, increment 1, for a total of 30.

Work will be performed at Sterling Heights, MI, with an estimated completion date of June 30/12. One bid was solicited and one bid received (W56HZV-06-G-0006). GDLS release.

Nov 20/08: +180 RESET. A $63.7 million firm-fixed-price contract, exercising an option to RESET 180 Abrams M1A2 SEPv1 to SEPv2 tanks. Work will be performed in Tallahassee, FL, Anniston, AL, Scranton, PA, and Sterling Heights, MI, with an estimated completion date of Sept 30/10. One bid was solicited and one bid was received (W56HZV-06-G-0006).

See also Aug 5/08 entry, and the GDLS release.

Aug 29/08: General Dynamics Lands Systems Division in Sterling Heights, MI received a $30.8 million cost-reimbursable contract to procure long-lead-materials. These materials will be bought in as a prelude to upgrading 129 Third Armored Cavalry Regiment Abrams tanks to the M1A2 SEP configuration.

Work will be performed in Lima, OH; Tallahassee, FL; Anniston, AL; Scranton, PA; and Sterling Heights, MI, with an estimated completion date of Oct 31/09. One bid was solicited, and one bid was received (W56HZV-06-G-0006).

Aug 5/08: A $613.5 million Firm Fixed Price, contract for Award Program Year One increment 2, in a multi-year contract for Abrams M1A2 SEPv2 upgrades. The contract will upgrade 235 M1A1 tanks to this configuration.

The order was made under a multi-year contract (see Feb 7/08 entry) which authorized the modernization of 435 M1A1 tanks that have been in the Army’s inventory for more than 20 years. An additional 180 tanks remain to be upgraded through the program, which will complete the conversion of all tanks in the Army’s active component to the M1A2 SEP V2 configuration.

Work will be performed in Lima, OH; Anniston, AL; Tallahassee, FL; Sterling Heights, MI; and Scranton, PA, and is expected to be complete by Oct 31/11. There was one bid solicited from the manufacturer on Oct 5/07, and one bid was received (W56HZV-06-G-0006). See also GDLS release.

June 3/08: A $19.8 million cost-reimbursable-no-fee contract for the procurement of long lead material to support maintenance of 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment Abrams M1A2 SEP tanks. Work will be performed primarily in Lima, OH and is expected to be complete by Oct 30/09. One bid was solicited on April 29/08 (W56HZV-06-G-0006).

April 28/08: A $28.2 million cost-no-fee contract for long lead materials, which will be used in the recapitalization of M1A2 SEPv1 tanks. Work will be performed primarily in Lima, OH and is expected to be complete on Nov 28/08. One bid was solicited on Jan 18/08 (W56HZV-06-G-0006).

Jan 15/08: A $12.4 million cost-no fee contract “for system enhancement package upgrade vehicles.” Work will be performed in Lima Army Tank Plant, OH, and is expected to be complete by April 30, 2008. One bid was solicited on Oct 5/07, and 1 bid was received (W56HZV-06-G-0006).

Dec 19/07: +180 RESET. General Dynamics Land Systems announces a $257.8 million award for procurement of materials and labor required to RESET 180 Abrams tanks under the Abrams Improved SEP Reset (ISR) program. The program could total more than $320 million if all options are exercised. As part of the Improved Systems Enhancement Package (SEP) Reset program, M1A2 SEP Version 1 tanks are modified to the SEP Version 2 configuration.

Deliveries begin in September 2009, and are expected to be complete by September 2010. Work will be performed by existing employees in Anniston, AL; Tallahassee, FL; Lima, OH; Sterling Heights, MI; and Scranton, PA. There was 1 bid solicited on Feb 13/07, and 1 bid was received (W56HZV-06-G-0006).

Nov 19/07: +240 RESET. General Dynamics Land Systems received an $88.8 million firm-fixed-price contract for reset of 240 M1A2 Abrams tanks. Work will be performed in Lima, OH and is expected to be complete by Sept. 30, 2009 (W56HZV-06-G-0006).

As part of the reset program, M1A2 SEP Version 1 tanks are upgraded to the SEP Version 2 configuration. GDLS release.

Oct 3/07: A $16.5 million delivery order as part of a $24 million firm-fixed-price contract to provide parts for the reset of battle-damaged SEPv1 Tanks to a SEPv2 configuration. Work will be performed in Sterling Heights, MI, and is expected to be complete by Dec. 31, 2009. This was a sole source contract initiated on May 14, 2007 (W56HZV-06-G-0006).

Oct 1/07: A delivery order amount of $20.1 million as part of a $510.5 million firm-fixed-price contract for reset of Abrams M1A2 System Enhancement Packages to the M1A2 Tanks. As part of the Improved Systems Enhancement Package (SEP) reset program, M1A2 SEP Version 1 tanks are modified to the SEP Version 2 configuration, which includes improved displays, sights, power, and a tank-infantry phone. It is the most technologically advanced digital Abrams tank and is positioned for future technology insertions for compatibility with the Army’s Future Combat Systems.

Work will be performed in Lima, OH (75%), Tallahassee, FL (10%), Anniston, AL (9%), Scranton, PA (3%), and Sterling Heights, MI (3%), and is expected to be complete by Sept. 30, 2009. This was a sole source contract initiated on Oct. 20, 2006 (W56HZV-06-G-0006). GD release.

Aug 13/07: A delivery order amount of $5.7 million as part of a $6.3 million firm-fixed-price contract for spare parts for the M1A2 System Enhancement Program Tank. Work will be performed in Lima, OH and is expected to be complete by July 31, 2010. This was a sole source contract initiated on May 14, 2007 by the U.S. Army Tank-Automotive and Armaments Command in Rock Island, IL (DAAE20-02-G-0009).

Aug 8/07: +???. The full delivery order amount of $270.6 million as part of a firm-fixed-price contract for system enhancement package for the Abrams M1A2 Tanks. Work will be performed in Lima, OH (75%), Tallahassee, FL (10%), Anniston, AL (9%), Scranton, PA (3%), and Sterling Heights, MI (3%), and is expected to be complete by July 31/10. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This was a sole source contract initiated on March 16, 2007. The U.S. Army Tank-Automotive and Armaments Command, Warren, Mich., is the contracting activity (W56HZV-06-G-0006).

Aug 8/07: +???. The full delivery order amount of $139.3 million for retrofit of M1A2 Vehicles to M1A2 SEP Version 2 configuration. Work will be performed in Lima, OH (75%), Tallahassee, FL (10%), Anniston, AL (9%), Scranton, PA (3%), and Sterling Heights, MI (3%), and is expected to be complete by Jan 31/10. This was a sole source contract initiated on Feb. 21/07 (W56HZV-06-G-0006).

Specific details re: numbers et. al. are usually present in General Dynamics’ follow-on releases; not this time.

April 18/07: The full delivery order amount of $9.1 million as part of a cost contract for long-lead material for RESET for battle damaged M1A2 System Enhancement Package tanks. Work will be performed in Anniston, AL (40%), Lima, OH (20%), Sterling Heights, MI (10%), and Scranton, PA (30%), and is expected to be complete by June 30, 2007. This was a sole source contract initiated on April 10, 2007 (W56HZV-06-G-0006). GDLS release.

Dec 4/06: +312 RESET. A delivery order amount of $305 million as part of a $351 million cost contract for RESET of Abrams M1A2 System Enhancement Package (SEP)v1 to M1A2 SEPv2 tanks, and long lead material for the additional RESET of M1A2 SEPv1 and M1A2 SEPv2 tanks. A GDLS representative confirms that the contact covers 312 tanks returning from Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Work will be performed in Lima, OH (75%), Tallahassee, FL (10%), Anniston, AL (9%), Scranton, PA (3%), and Sterling Heights, MI (3%), and is expected to be complete on Sept. 30, 2009. This was a sole source contract initiated on Oct. 20, 2006 (W56HZV-06-G-0006).

Nov 27/06: +180. The full $379.8 million delivery order amount of a firm-fixed-price contract to upgrade 180 M1A2 tanks to Abrams M1A2 SEP Version 2 status, along with total packing fielding material for initial fielding. Work will be performed in Lima, OH (75%), Tallahassee, FL (10%), Anniston, AL (9%), Scranton, PA (3%), and Sterling Heights, MI (3%), and is expected to be complete by Nov 30/09. This was a sole source contract initiated on August 29, 2006 (W56HZV-06-G-0006). See also GDLS press release, and a subsequent release which gives the number. A GDLS representative confirmed that the conversions involved M1A2 tanks.

Nov 27/06: GM subsidiary Allison Transmission in Indianapolis, IN received an $11 million modification to a firm-fixed-price contract for Zero-Timed X1100-3B Transmissions in Support of the System Enhancement Package RESET Program. This would be the RESET maintenance program for M1A2 SEP tanks. Work will be performed in Indianapolis, IN and is expected to be complete by Nov. 30, 2007. This was a sole source contract initiated on Aug. 22, 2006 (DAAE07-01-C-N040).

Nov 27/06: GM subsidiary Allison Transmission in Indianapolis, IN received a $32.6 million modification to a firm-fixed-price contract for Zero-Timed X1100-3B Transmissions in Support of the Improved System Enhancement Package RESET Program. Work will be performed in Indianapolis, IN and is expected to be completed by Dec. 31, 2008. This was a sole source contract initiated on Sept. 29, 2006 (DAAE07-01-C-N040).

Nov 27/06: GM subsidiary Allison Transmission in Indianapolis, IN received a $24.2 million modification to a firm-fixed-price contract for Zero-Timed X1100-3B Transmissions in Support of the System Enhancement Package Retrofit Program. Work will be performed in Indianapolis, IN and is expected to be complete by Dec. 31, 2008. This was a sole source contract initiated on Aug. 18, 2006 (DAAE07-01-C-N040).

Nov 27/06: GM subsidiary Allison Transmission in Indianapolis, IN received a $16.1 million modification to a firm-fixed-price contract for Upgraded X1100-3B Transmissions with Refurbished Containers in Support of the System Enhancement Package Program. Work will be performed in Indianapolis, IN and is expected to be complete by April 30, 2008. This was a sole source contract initiated on Jan. 25, 2006 (DAAE07-01-C-N040).

Aug 4/06: +60. General Dynamics Land Systems in Sterling Heights, MI received the full delivery order amount of $134.7 million as part of a firm-fixed-price contract for Abrams M1A2 SEP (system enhancement package) retrofits to 60 existing M1A2 Abrams tanks, along with total package fielding material for initial fielding. The M1A2 SEP is the latest, most technologically advanced Abrams variant, and the contract also includes a $145 million option to upgrade 60 more M1A2s, bringing the total to $280 million if all options are exercised.

Work on this SEP upgrade contract will be performed in Lima, OH (75%), Tallahassee, FL (10%), Anniston, AL (9%), Scranton, PA (3%), and Sterling Heights, MI (3%). Delivery of the first 60 vehicles is slated to begin in November 2007 and is expected to be complete by Nov. 30, 2008. Delivery of the 60 option vehicles would begin in November 2008. This was a sole source contract initiated on Feb. 1, 2006 by the Army Tank-Automotive and Armaments Command in Warren, MI (W56HZV-06-G-0006).

July 8/05: An estimated $7.3 million firm-fixed price contract for 90 commanders display units for the M1A2 Abrams System Enhanced Program (M1A2 SEP) Tank. The work is to be performed at the company’s Tallahassee, FL location and is to be completed Sept. 20, 2007. The Tank-automotive Armament Command in Rock Island, IL issued the contract (DAAE20-02-G-0009 delivery order 0109).

June 20/05: +???. A $141.1 million firm-fixed-price contract for M1A2 Abrams Upgrade Tanks to the System and Continuous Enhancement Program Configurations. Work will be performed in Lima, OH (75%), Imperial Valley, CA (1%), Tallahassee, FL (1%), Sterling Heights, MI (1%), Scranton, PA (3%), and Anniston, AL (9%), and is expected to be complete by Jan. 31, 2008. This was a sole source contract initiated on March 1, 2003 (DAAE07-01-G-N001). See GDLS press release, which places the number of tanks upgraded to M1A2 SEP at 60. It adds that vehicle deliveries to General Dynamics are scheduled for January through October 2007, with vehicle hand-off to the U.S. Army expected in January 2008.

April 29/05: An $8.2 million cost-plus-fixed-fee and cost-plus-incentive-fee contract for unique spares for the M1A2 SEP Abrams Tank, and Bradley Fighting Vehicles. Work will be performed in Killeen, TX (85%); Sterling Heights, MI (10%); and Southwest Asia (5%), and is expected to be complete by April 30, 2010. This was a sole source contract initiated on April 14, 2004 by US Army Tank-Automotive and Armaments Command in Rock Island, IL (W52H09-05-C-0089). See also GDLS press release.

Sept 2/04: A $22.4 million firm-fixed-price contract for repair and modification to 111 M1A2 SEP Tanks. Work will be performed in Lima, OH and is expected to be complete by July 30, 2005. This was a sole source contract initiated on July 14, 2004 (DAAE07-01-G-N001). A subsequent GDLS press release clarified that this is a contract “to repair and modify 111 M1A2 Abrams System Enhancement Package (SEP) tanks that have recently returned from the war zone.” Work will be performed at the Joint Systems Manufacturing Center in Lima, Ohio, and is expected to be complete by July 30, 2005. The total value for this effort is actually about $70 million, allocated between TACOM ($40 million, to include major component repair by Anniston Army Depot), and GDLS ($29.9 Million).

May 6/04: +65. General Dynamics Land Systems announces a $121 million delivery order as part of a contract valued at $244 million, to retrofit 65 M1A2 Abrams tanks to the M1A2 SEP (System Enhancement Program) configuration. The tanks are being retrofitted to modernize the U.S. Army’s 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment.

Work will be performed with the existing workforce at General Dynamics’ facilities in Lima, OH (74%); Tallahassee, FL (10%); Anniston, AL (9%); Scranton, PA (3%); Imperial Valley, CA. (1%); Muskegon, MI (1%); and Sterling Heights, MI (1%). Work will also be done at Fort Carson, CO (1%).

May 15/03: +14. A delivery order amount of $26 million, under a firm-fixed-price contract to retrofit 14 M1A2 Abrams Upgrade Tanks to the M1A2 SEP configuration. Work will be performed in Lima, OH (75%), Imperial Valley, CA (1%), Tallahassee, FL (10%), Sterling Heights, MI (1%), Scranton, PA (3%), Anniston, AL (9%), and Muskegon, IL (1%), and is expected to be completed by Dec. 31, 2004. This was a sole source contract initiated on April 29, 2002 (DAAE07-01-G-N001).

Nov 29/02: A delivery order amount of $5.8 million as part of an $8.8 million firm-fixed-price contract for 10 gigabyte solid state removable memory cartridges for retrofit into M1A2 Abrams SEP tanks. Work will be performed in Sterling Heights (0.2%) and Bloomington, MN (99.8%), and is to be complete by Aug. 31, 2003. This was a sole source contract initiated on Nov. 15, 2002 (DAAE07-01-G-N001).

May 16/02: A delivery order amount of $2.9 million as part of a $5.8 million (cumulative total) un-priced contractual action for 9 lines of spare parts in support of the M1A2 SEP Abrams Tank. Work will be performed in Lima, OH (10%); Imperial, CA (40%); Tallahassee, FL (40%), Anniston, AL (10%), and is to be complete by Oct. 30, 2003. This is a sole-source contract initiated on Feb. 14, 2002 by the U. S. Army Tank and Automotive Command in Rock Island, IL (DAAE20-97-G-0002).

Feb 9/01: +240. A $142 million modification to firm-fixed-price, multi-year contract DAAE07-95-C-0292. This procurement is an equitable adjustment to change-order modification P00110, that incorporated the System Enhancement Package (SEP) into 240 M1A2 Abrams Upgrade Tanks. This modification adds first article tests for the SEP into 240 tanks, adds material and testing for Under Armor Auxiliary Power Units that are to be retrofitted onto M1A2 Abrams Upgrade Tanks with the SEP.

Work will be performed in Lima, OH (80%); Scranton, PA (3%); Imperial Valley, CA (1%); Anniston, AL (4%); Tallahassee, FL (10%); Muskegon, MS (1%), and Sterling Heights, MI (1%), and is expected to be complete by Dec. 31, 2001. Of the total contract funds, $97.3 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This is a sole source contract initiated on Jan. 18, 1995.

Jan 16/01: The Research Triangle Institute in Research Triangle Park, NC received a $6 million modification to a previously awarded firm-fixed-price contract N61339-95-C-0015, exercising an option for the production of one M1A2 Tank System Enhancement Package and one Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS) Maintenance Training System, Trainer Unique Modification Kit.

Work will be performed in Research Triangle Park, NC (60%) and Daytona, FL (40%); and is expected to be complete by September 2001. The Naval Air Warfare Center Training Systems Division in Orlando, FL issued the contract.

Feb 10/2000: The Research Triangle Institute in Research Triangle Park, NC received a $5 million modification to previously awarded contract N61339-95-C-0015 for the design, refurbishment, documentation, fabrication, integration, testing, manufacture, delivery and installation of the M1A2 system enhancement package maintenance training systems. Work will be performed in Research Triangle Park, NC (60%) and Daytona, FL (40%), and is expected to be complete by November 2000. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Warfare Center Training Systems Division in Orlando, FL issued the contract.

Dec 22/99: A $24.9 million modification to cost-plus-fixed-fee contract DAAE07-96-C-X195, to exercise the option for system technical support for the Abrams Tank Program, a system enhancement package M1A2 retrofit for the Abrams Tank. Work will be performed in Sterling Heights, MI and is expected to be complete by July 30, 2001. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This is a sole source contract initiated on May 2, 1996.

Nov 23/99: A $5 modification to cost-plus-fixed-fee contract DAAE07-96-C-X195, to exercise priced options for system technical support for the Abrams Tank Program, the M1A2 retrofit System Enhancement Package. Work will be performed in Sterling Heights, MI and is expected to be complete by Aug. 30, 2001. This is a sole source contract initiated on May 2, 1996.

May 4/98: A $9.1 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for various spares in support of fielding of the System Enhancement Package (SEP) of the M1A2 upgrade tank. Work will be performed in Tallahassee, FL (75%); Lima, OH (10%); Imperial Valley, CA (10%); and Scranton, OH (5%), and is expected to be complete by Dec. 31, 2000. This is a sole source contract initiated on Dec. 8, 1997 by the U.S. Army Tank-automotive & Armaments Command at Rock Island, IL (DAAE20-97-G-0002/0008).

Sept 26/97: A $7.3 million increment of a $24.3 million modification to a $127.3 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for research and development for the Abrams System Enhancement Package (ASEP) that will be incorporated into the M1A2 Abrams Tank. Work will be performed in Sterling Heights, MI and is expected to be complete by Feb. 28, 1999. Of the total contract funds, $14,757 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This is a sole source contract initiated on Nov. 23, 1994 (DAAE07-94-C-0727).

Aug 8/96: A $10 million modification to a cost plus fixed fee contract for two Heavy Assault Bridge Pre-Low Rate Initial Production Pilot/Test vehicles in Abrams M1A2 System Enhancement Package (SEP) configuration. Work will be performed in Sterling Heights, MI and is expected to be complete by February 28, 1998. This is a sole source contract initiated on May 29, 1996 (DAAE07-94-C-0727).

Additional Readings & Sources

• The Armor Site – M1A1/2 Abrams. Simply the best Abrams tank reference.
• James Hasik’s “What to do about Lima and York” series (March – August 2013) – Part 1 | Part 2 – findings from A.T. Kearney, and a radical suggestion for consolidation | Part 3 – and now the Iraqi-Saudi alternative.
• NBC News (July 28/12) – The M1 Abrams: The Army tank that could not be stopped
• US Army – (Feb 19/08) – Modified M1-A2 Abrams Tanks Improve Safety, Precision. Describes the TUSK modifications.
• US Army Logistics Management College, ALOG Magazine (Jan-Feb 1996) – Keeping M1A1’s in Action. A new way to employ the Army’s M1A1 full-up power pack (FUPP) saves time and money and helps ensure a combat-ready tank unit. A FUPP consists of a Honeywell AGT-1500 turbine engine, which contains four modules, and an Allison X1100-3B transmission.

“The Government plans to acquire an MRAP All-Terrain Vehicle (M-ATV). The M-ATV is a lighter, off-road, and more maneuverable vehicle that incorporates current MRAP level [bullet and mine blast] protection. The M-ATV will require effectiveness in an off-road mission profile. The vehicle will include EFP (Explosively Formed Projectile land mine) and RPG (Rocket Propelled Grenade panzerfaust) protection (integral or removable kit). The M-ATV will maximize both protection levels and off-road mobility & maneuverability attributes, and must balance the effects of size and weight while attempting to achieve the stated requirements.”
— US government FedBizOpps, November 2008

Oshkosh Defense’s M-ATV candidate secured a long-denied MRAP win, and the firm continues to remain ahead of production targets. The initial plan expected to spend up to $3.3 billion to order 5,244 M-ATVs for the US Army (2,598), Marine Corps (1,565), Special Operations Command (643), US Air Force (280) and the Navy (65), plus 93 test vehicles. FY 2010 budgets and subsequent purchases have pushed this total even higher, and orders now stand at over 8,800 for the USA, plus another 800 for the UAE.

MRAP ATV: Requirements and Contenders

Monthly delivery rates of up to 1,000 vehicles were part of the solicitation; when combined with requirements around classified data and regulatory compliance, the only reasonable contenders were firms that already produced MRAPs, trucks, or tactical vehicles for American forces: BAE Systems, General Dynamics, Force Protection, Navistar, and Oshkosh.

M-ATV vehicles will hold 4 passengers, including the driver, and a gunner. That seems very similar to the MRAP Category I vehicles, and it is. On the other hand, a WIRED Danger Room story noted:

“As Captain Charles O’Neill, commander of B Company, 1st Battalion, 6th Marine Regiment, told me, a few of the MRAPs had “gone into the wadi” – i.e., rolled over – during operations in Helmand. “The MRAP is an outstanding vehicle for force protection,” he said. “It would do great on paved roads. However, here in southern Helmand province, the roads don’t facilitate the MRAP necessarily that well.”

One option has involved refitting existing MRAP vehicles. Over 1,300 of Force Protection’s Cougars will receive Oshkosh TAK-4 independent suspensions, which are already in use on the Marines’ MTVR trucks, in order to improve their all-terrain handling. Other MRAP types are also receiving similar suspension refits from Oshkosh or from Arvin-Meritor.

The other response was the M-ATV competition, which aims to field a vehicle with an (empty equipped) curb weight under 25,000 pounds, and the protection and mobility characteristics described above. That’s still considerably heavier than a Hummer; the ubiquitous M1114 maxes out at 12,000 pounds with its add-on armor, and the top of M-ATV’s range is similar to a number of MRAP Category I contenders’ curb weights. Its mission is small unit combat operations in highly restricted, rural, mountainous and/or urban environments.

M-ATVs will be used for mounted patrols, reconnaissance, security, convoy protection, communications, command and control and combat service support. To that end, it will be qualified for fit out with a variety of equipment, from LRAS3 surveillance and targeting systems, to accompanying ROVER IV systems for working with UAV video feeds and TacAir support, to TOW ITAS anti-armor missiles, to CREW frequency jammers as land-mine protection, to Boomerang or Doubleshot anti-sniper systems, to CROWS II remote weapons systems, as required.

M-ATV Contenders

A number of firms competed. Dave Hansen of JPO MRAP says that the initial competition involved about 10 candidates, which was narrowed down during source selection. Some known candidates include:

BAE’s Global Tactical Systems division submitted a model that is based on their Caiman Light MRAP, which in turn is based on the Army’s standard FMTV medium trucks. GTS M-ATV includes a number of changes, most notably a smaller crew compartment and a lengthened “nose” to provide better balance.

BAE U.S. Combat Systems’ M-ATV looked somewhat like its Valanx JLTV entry, but has greater protection levels, with a smaller and more protected crew capsule that was purpose-built to M-ATV requirements. The Arvin-Meritor suspension, the drive train, and the power train are shared with their Valanx, as is the 6 liter V8 engine. The firm has continued Valanx development, and submitted it for the JLTV competition.

Force Protection teamed with General Dynamics to submit their Cheetah vehicle, which had been in development since 2005. The Cheetah has been evaluated by the US Marines, and had a curb weight of just 14,000 pounds when introduced. Subsequent variants have reportedly passed sponsored Army testing to MRAP I survivability levels, and has undergone initial mobility and durability testing at the Nevada Automotive Test Center. The Cheetah was a new addition for Force Dynamics, which had previously been confined to producing the Cougar vehicles that did so much to spark the MRAP program.

Force Dynamics, LLC added Raytheon to their team, in order to provide a comprehensive command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance system (C4ISR) plug-and-play ready architecture for the M-ATV Cheetah, using the C4ISR Department of Defense Architecture Framework (DoDAF). It would allow plug-and-play integration of a wide range of Army electronics, while also improving the vehicles’ monitoring capabilities. Cheetah failed to win the M-ATV spot, and was discontinued shortly thereafter. In 2011, Force Protection was bought by General Dynamics Land Systems.

General Dynamics Land Systems attempted to field a variant of the RG-31. This vehicle, offered in partnership with BAE and the Canadian government, had been ordered by American units before the MRAP program began, received additional MRAP orders, and reportedly earned good reviews for its Afghan performance. GDLS initial 2 M-ATV prototypes were not accepted for testing, however leaving General Dynamics with its Force Dynamics partnership as its only M-ATV option. It eventually bought Force Protection in 2011.

Navistar led the original MRAP competition, and submitted an M-ATV design based on the MXT/Husky design that won one of Britain’s OUVS orders for future Tactical Support Vehicles. Their derived M-ATV prototype used a specially-designed, light-weight armor. That advantage is compounded by a smaller base that allows them to weigh significantly less than its MaxxPro Dash MRAP, while using the same MaxxForce D 6.0 liter V8 engine.

Navistar would be able to support its M-ATV units in theater through its existing dealer and parts and support network, which includes locations in Afghanistan. They didn’t win the M-ATV competition, but they have received orders for more of their MaxxPro Dash vehicles since M-ATV began.

Oshkosh Defense won, but they had far less success to build on. In the MRAP competition, its PVI partnership entry for MRAP Category I failed testing, while its Bushmaster partnership with Thales for MRAP Category II received no orders, despite a successful record of front line service with Australian and Dutch forces. Its JLTV entry with Northrop Grumman was not among the initial round’s 3 picks, even as BAE participated in 2 of the winning entries, General Dynamics in one, and Navistar in one. A GAO protest failed to change that outcome, despite an attractive price for their entry. It had been a surprising series of setbacks for the firm that produces and supports the US Army’s FHTV heavy truck fleet, and the US Marines’ MTVR medium and LVSR heavy trucks.

Northrop Grumman was not a partner for M-ATV, but Oshkosh did leverage its long-standing relationship with Plasan Sasa of Israel to develop an armoring approach that could meet full MRAP protection levels. Plasan Sasa had up-armored Oshkosh’s MTVR trucks for the Marines, and was also Navistar’s armoring partner for the successful MaxxPro MRAP family.

Oshkosh’s M-ATV and Variants

At present, the winning entry is known only as the “Oshkosh M-ATV”. It has an empty “curb weight” of 25,000 pounds, and a Gross Vehicle Weight of 32,500 pounds, including the M-ATV objective maximum of 4,000 pounds of payload. A 2011 JROC decision allowed the curb weight to rise to 32,000 pounds, in order to handle improved underbody protection and other armor.

Oshkosh’s design bore many visual similarities to their JLTV TD Phase entry, but without the high-end systems like a hybrid drive, which would have required further development. The core of the vehicle is the US Marines’ MTVR medium truck chassis, and its TAK-4 suspension. TAK-4 is being used to refit Cougar MRAPs, and already exceeds M-ATV’s off road specifications by offering a 70% off road mobility profile (M-ATV specs: 50%), with more than 16 inches of independent wheel travel. An Oshkosh representative told DID that “generally speaking [TAK-4] will increase the speed of the vehicle by 1.5 – 2.5 times over the speed of the same vehicle with a straight axle suspension, without sacrificing ride quality.” The vehicle’s C7 engine is also broadly common to other vehicles, and was used in more than 18,000 vehicles fielded in Iraq and Afghanistan at the time of the award.

M-ATV’s Super Multi-Hit Armor Technology (SMART) armor is used in theater by NATO, and has since been augmented by “Underbody Improvement Kits” to improve mine protection.

Oshkosh has also created 3 variant M-ATV designs, apart from its base platform.

The M-ATV utility variant adds a flatbed to the basic M-ATV, and is suitable for light cargo duties in dangerous areas that need a lot of off-road travel.

The M-ATV tactical ambulance variant was unveiled in February 2010. It maintains the M-ATV’s TAK-4 independent suspension systems, 16″ of independent wheel travel with a 2-channel central tire-inflation system with 4 terrain settings. It uses a 370hp engine, with an Allison 3500 SP transmission, and seats 3 crew members plus 2 litters or 4 ambulatory patients. Feedback from the military led to a side-by-side litter layout.

The SOF M-ATV variant is designed for special forces. It features a modified cargo deck, intended to accept swap-ins of specialized equipment, with the rear storage accessible through an armored cargo access hatch in the passenger capsule. Reconnaissance equipment is likely to be a least one such specialized package. It will also have a larger front windscreens for better visibility. DOT&E testing has criticized its rear visibility, acceleration, and restricted internal space, and declared it “not operationally suitable” beyond standard transport and area reconnaissance missions. Fixes can be expected for the fleet of 421.

Beyond M-ATV, JLTV beckons.

By winning the M-ATV competition, Oshkosh has secured 3 valuable prizes. One is significant representation in the USA’s MRAP-type buys, with its attendant near-term cash flow. The second prize is a success story in the tactical vehicle category, something Oshkosh has not been known for in the past. The 3rd prize stems from the other 2, and involves the JLTV competition that will follow M-ATV to replace a sizeable portion of the USA’s Hummer fleet. Since JLTV is designed as an open competition at each stage, the Oshkosh/Northrop Grumman team’s loss in round 1 just forces Oshkosh to spend its own development dollars if it wants to remain in the race. By securing the M-ATV tactical vehicle design win and attendant production funding, those improvements and investments became much easier to make.

That’s exactly what happened, as Oshkosh leveraged its win into a smaller L-ATV design that it submitted for JLTV’s Engineering & Manufacturing Development Phase.

Contracts and Key Events

Under the M-ATV program, each competitor submitted 2 vehicles for initial testing, and some received a 2nd order for 3 more test vehicles. That was followed by a sole source contract, which could escalate to 10,000 vehicles. So far, US contracts for vehicle production alone have involved $4.47 billion for 8,800 vehicles.

Unless otherwise noted, Oshkosh Corp. in Oshkosh, WI is the contractor, taking orders from the U.S. Army Tank and Automotive Command Contracting Command in Warren, MI.

July 23/18: Technical Support The US Army is contracting Oshkosh Defense for technical support. The $13.9 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract provides for a number of support activities on the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected All-Terrain Vehicle family of vehicles. The Oshkosh M-ATV has an empty “curb weight” of 25,000 pounds, and a Gross Vehicle Weight of 32,500 pounds, including the M-ATV objective maximum of 4,000 pounds of payload. The core of the vehicle is the US Marines’ MTVR medium truck chassis, and its TAK-4 suspension, giving it a 70% off-road mobility profile. M-ATV’s Super Multi-Hit Armor Technology (SMART) armor is used in theater by NATO and has since been augmented by “Underbody Improvement Kits” to improve mine protection. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of July, 2021.

Jan 7/13: Support. A $10.8 million contract for M-ATV field service representatives in Afghanistan, which runs until April 30/13. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received (W56HZV-12-C-0281).

Dec 20/12: SOCOM. A $7.8 million firm-fixed-price contract buys Underbody Improvement Kits for M-ATV Special Operations Vehicles. Work will be performed in Afghanistan, with an estimated completion date of Dec 17/13. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received (W56HZV-12-C-0281).

May 29/12: Support. A $7 million firm-fixed-price contract to install M-ATV underbody improvement kits for the Special Operations variant. Work will be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of Dec 31/12. One bid was solicited, with one bid received (W56HZV-12-C-0281).

April 25/12: Support. A $16.1 million firm-fixed-price contract for M-ATV support services in Afghanistan, Japan, Germany, and Oshkosh, WI, until Dec 31/12. Five bids were solicited, with 5 bids received for the original solicitation by U.S. Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI (W56HZV-09-D-0111).

April 9/12: Support. A $25.3 million firm-fixed-price contract modification, for M-ATV support services. Work will be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of Dec 31/12. Five bids were solicited, with 5 bids received by U.S. Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI (W56HZV-09-D-0111).

Feb 28/12: Upgrades. A $30.3 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for SOF M-ATV underbody improvement kits. Work will be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of Aug 15/12. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received by U.S. Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI (W56HZV-09-D-0111).

Feb 22/12: Industrial. Oshkosh Defense announces the 3,900th Oshkosh MRAP All-Terrain Vehicle (M-ATV) Underbody Improvement Kit (UIK) installed in theater, in less than 7 months.

The MRAP JPO established 10 UIK installation sites in Afghanistan, while Oshkosh designed the lean process flow and specified, procured, packaged and delivered the tooling required to support the installations. So far, 3,500 installed kits were achieved using the MRAP JPO’s universal workforce and Oshkosh technicians, and were applied in-theater without the need for welding or major fabrication. Another 400 M-ATV UIKs have been installed by U.S. military technicians in Afghanistan, and Oshkosh delivered more than 500 new M-ATVs with factory-installed UIKs, making a grand total of 4,400 equipped vehicles.

Beyond the M-ATV, The U.S. Army has ordered more than 400 UIKs, also known as C-Kit armor, for the Oshkosh Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical Truck (HEMTT) A4, and Oshkosh is developing a UIK for the Army’s FMTV medium trucks as well. Oshkosh Defense.

Jan 5/12: Support. A $24.1 million firm-fixed-price contract for M-ATV related services. Work will be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of Jan 9/13. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received (W56HZV-09-D-0111).

Dec 23/11: Q-Net. A $10.3 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for 465 M-ATV Rocket Propelled Grenade Net Delta kits. Similar orders have been placed to BAE, but the kits are actually QinetiQ’s Q-Net, ordered through the vehicle’s prime contractors.

Work will be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of April 29/12. One bid was solicited, with one bid received (W56HZV-09-D-0111).

Nov 10/11: Mufflers. A $9.8 million firm-fixed-price contract for 8,011 M-ATV muffler kits. Work will be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of April 29/12. One bid was solicited, with one bid received (W56HZV-09-D-0111).

Oct 3/11: JLTV. The latest Army-Marine Corps JLTV solicitation favors existing designs over new, and may lead to the program’s demise in favor of recapitalized and modified HMMWVs.

An opportunity for Oshkosh? The JLTV’s $250,000 target cost means the firm would have to drive down costs very sharply, compared to the M-ATV’s standard purchase cost near $500,000. The question is whether their new L-ATV might give them another option, and if so, whether Oshkosh wants to offer it.

By reducing expected JLTV production to just 20,000 vehicles over 8 years (3 LRIP, 5 full-rate), it becomes more difficult for firms to recover costs for new designs. On the other hand, demands to hand over technical data rights, and a plan to re-compete the production contract for the winning vehicle after several years, make it unattractive for firms to place a valuable existing design at risk. US Army TACOM Page | FBO.gov | Lexington Institute.

Aug 2/11: Support. Oshkosh in Oshkosh, WI receives a $34.3 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for “services in support of the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected All-Terrain Vehicle.” Work will be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of Dec 31/11. One bid was solicited, with one bid received by the U.S. Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI (W56HZV-09-D-0111).

Announced contract totals for M-ATV ancillary items and services currently total just under $2 billion, though a large percentage of that involves protective bolt-on equipment.

July 20/11: Support. A $20.9 million firm-fixed-price contract for 75 technicians, who will work for a year to will work to install underbody improvement kits on M-ATVs in Oshkosh, WI. The contract is expected to run to Dec 31/11. One bid was solicited, with one bid received (W56HZV-09-D-0111).

June 29/11: +400. A $218.7 million firm-fixed-price contract for 400 M-ATVs with the underbody improvement kits pre-installed. That’s about $546,500 per vehicle, plus communication systems, weapons, etc. which are extra.

Work will be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of June 30/12. One bid was solicited, with one bid received. by U.S. Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI (W56HZV-09-D-0111).

June 20/11: Upgrades. A $226.3 million firm-fixed-price contract for 5,131 M-ATV underbody improvement kits. So far, orders cover 8,011 of those kits. The M-ATV is very well regarded by troops in theater, but the fleet-wide scale of these refits suggests a weakness which the US Army is rushing to close.

Work will be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of June 30/12. One bid was solicited with one bid received (W56HZH-09-D-0111).

June 2/11: Sub-contractors. Skydex Technologies, Inc. in Centennial, CO announces “…multiple contracts valued at over a million dollars with the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) to provide its blast mitigating Convoy Deck product for the M-ATV vehicle. The purchase orders will allow DLA to have prepositioned replacement decking for 1,000 vehicles in service in Afghanistan.”

Think of 2 sheets of bubble wrap, facing each other, using advanced plastics, and varying layout, spacing, or materials to achieve the shock cushioning effect required. That’s the concept behind their patented SKYDEX, which has been shown to significantly reduce blast-related injuries by absorbing much of the initial shock that the blast wave transmits through the floor. SKYDEX has been installed on RG-31, Cougar, and M-ATV MRAPs, and on Stryker Double-V-Hull APCs.

May 25/11: +177. A $97.1 million firm-fixed-price contract for 177 M-ATVs, with underbody improvement kits pre-installed. The total contract could actually rise to $111.4 million, and it was listed as Delivery Order #10 in the May 24/11 version of this announcement.

Work will be performed in McConnelsburg, PA; Milwaukee, WI; and Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of Jan 31/11. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received by U.S. Army TACOM LCMC in Warren, MI (W56HZV-09-D-0111).

May 25/11: Support. A $19.8 million firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract for special tooling and subject matter experts. They’ll perform installation, and provide installation training, associated with M-ATV underbody improvement kits. The Pentagon has ordered thousands of them kits, but ordering them and installing them are 2 different things.

Work will be performed in Afghanistan, with an estimated completion date of May 31/12. U.S. Army TACOM LCMC in Warren, MI solicited 5 bids, with five bids received (W56HZV-09-D-0111).

April 4/11: Support. A $31.4 million firm-fixed-price indefinite delivery / indefinite quantity contract for 94 field services representatives for 12 months, in support of the M-ATV. Work will be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of May 31/12. Five bids were solicited with five bids received. The U.S. Army TACOM LCMC, Warren, MI solicited 5 bids for the original contract, with 5 bids received (W56HZV-09-D-0111).

Feb 21/11: MMV variant. Oshkosh Defense unveils an M-ATV 2.5 utility cargo variant called the Multi-Mission Vehicle, equipped with storage for Raytheon’s BGM-71 TOW anti-tank missile systems.

Feb 9/11: Upgrades. A $101.9 million firm-fixed-price indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract for 2,080 M-ATV underbody improvement kits – about $36,400 per kit. Work will be performed in Oshkosh, Wis., with an estimated completion date of May 3/12. One bid were solicited with one bid received (W56HZV-09-D-0111, corrected April 6/11 ).

Jan 31/11: Industrial. Oshkosh Defense announces that they’re opening a larger California Regional Logistics Center Temecula facility is scheduled to open in February 2011, and will provide vehicle operator and maintenance training to Marines and Navy Seabees. The old facility was mostly used for Navy and USMC training on the MRAP All-Terrain Vehicle (M-ATV), Medium Tactical Vehicle Replacement (MTVR) medium truck, and Logistics Vehicle System Replacement (LVSR) heavy truck.

Jan 19/11: Support. A $22.6 million firm-fixed-price indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contract for 972 man-months of M-ATV support. Work will be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of May 31/12. Five bids were solicited with 5 bids received for the original contract (W56HZV-09-D-0111).

Dec 29/10: Upgrades. An $80 million firm-fixed-price indefinite delivery/indefinite quality contract for 800 M-ATV underbody improvement kits. Work will be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of April 29/12. Five bids were solicited with 5 bids received (W56HZV-09-D-0001).

Dec 13/10: Support. A $30 million firm-fixed-price indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for 133 Special Operations Command (SOCOM) spares kits for M-ATVs, including 41 authorized stockage list kits; 33 prescribed load list kits; 42 battle damage and repair kits; and 17 deprocessing spares kits. The contract will be performed in Oshkosh, WI, and will run until May 31/12, but deliveries of the spare parts are scheduled to run from March – June 2011. (W56HZV-09-D-0111). See also Oshkosh release.

Dec 3/10: +46 SOCOM. A $28 million firm-fixed-price contract for 46 M-ATV Special Operations Command (SOCOM) variants with their SOCOM-specific enhancements. See also June 1/10 entry.

Work is to be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of May 31/12, but vehicle deliveries are scheduled to take place in May 2011. Five bids were solicited with 5 bids received for the original competition (W56HZV-09-D-0111).

Sept 9/10: Turret fix. BAE Systems Survivability Systems, LLC in Fairfield, OH receives an $11.6 million firm-fixed-price contract for 1,113 improved turret drive system/internal drive gears for the M-ATV. BAE makes a lot of land vehicle turrets, but the weight of their protection makes them hard to turn manually, especially if the vehicle is going uphill. A mechanical assist goes a long way in those circumstances.

Estimated completion date is Dec 27/11, with work to be performed at Fairfield, OH. One bid was solicited and one bid was received (W56HZV-10-C-0365).

Aug 31/10: Support. A maximum $14.2 million firm-fixed-price, sole-source contract for M-ATV sustainment spares to the US Army. There was originally one proposal solicited with one response and the contract will run to June 24/11. The Defense Logistics Agency Land in Warren, MI (SPRDL1-10-C-0173).

Aug 24/10: CRS Report. The US congressional Research Service releases the latest version [PDF] of its report “Mine-Resistant, Ambush-Protected (MRAP) Vehicles: Background and Issues for Congress. Excerpts:

“As of June 28, 2010, more than 8,500 MRAPs had reportedly been shipped to Afghanistan, with over 3,500 of those being the newer M-ATVs. The Army has recently said that it will begin development of yet another MRAP version – the “Ultra-Lite MRAP” – which raises questions about possible vehicle redundancies. The Marines, although voicing support for the M-ATV program, have retrofitted a number of MRAPs with new suspension systems and reportedly are satisfied with the results. This apparent success calls into question not only if the Marines need all of the M-ATVs allocated to them by DOD but also if the Marines’ retrofitted suspension system might be a more cost-effective alternative for the other services… Among potential issues for congressional consideration are the status of almost 5,000 MRAPS in Afghanistan that are reportedly not being used because of their size and weight.”

In terms of overall budgets:

“Through FY2010, Congress appropriated $34.95 billion for all versions of the MRAP. In March 2010, DOD reprogrammed an additional $3.9 billion from the Overseas Contingency Operations fund to MRAP procurement. Congress approved an additional $1.2 billion for MRAP procurement, included in the FY2010 Supplemental Appropriations Act (P.L. 111-212). The full FY2011 DOD budget request of $3.4 billion for the MRAP Vehicle Fund has been authorized by the House (H.R. 5136).”

Aug 17/10: DoD Buzz reports that the US Army’s latest Tactical Vehicle Strategy looks like bad news for the JLTV, with small buys spaced over time to equip deployed units. Bottom line?

“Here’s the basic plan. Overall, the Army will shrink its fleet of HUMVEEs, MRAPs and medium trucks to 244,000 by 2025 from its current 260,000. How? The service will rid itself of 4,000 of the hardest to maintain and most beat up MRAPS by 2025. It will scrap the 28,000-strong M35 fleet and replace it with new FMTVs for a fleet total of 76,000. That will mean a total reduction of 4,000 trucks. The HUMVEE fleet will shrink the most, going from 101,000 to 35,000 by 2025. But there appears to be one big hole in the Army plan. It does not project how many Joint Light Tactical Wheeled Vehicles it will be. The strategy’s answer: TBD.”

The JLTV competes for a niche similar enough to the M-ATV’s that its loss could be the M-ATV’s gain. See the full Army Tactical Vehicle Strategy [PDF].

Aug 13/10: EFP kits. A $40.8 million firm-fixed-price contract for 292 explosively formed penetrator M-ATV protection kits. EFP land mines use a shaped charge to instantly forge a metal penetrator jet that is fired into the side or bottom of a passing vehicle.

Work will be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of May 31/12. US Army TACOM, AMSCC-TAC-ADCA in Warren, MI solicited 5 bids, with 5 bids received in the original program (W56HZV-09-D-0111).

Aug 13/10: Support. An $18 million firm-fixed-price contract for 59 field service representatives for 708 months, to be located in Afghanistan and locations in the contiguous U.S. to support the M-ATV. Work is to be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of May 31/12. US Army TACOM, AMSCC-TAC-ADCA in Warren, MI solicited 5 bids, with 5 bids received in the original program (W56HZV-09-D-0111).

August 1/10: Combat report. Voice of America reports that the troops like the M-ATV a lot, but adds that some of its design features create maintenance issues:

“Staff Sergeant Richard Green, an 82nd Airborne Division mechanic, found this out first-hand when he accidentally damaged his unit’s first M-ATV. “There’s a nut on the inside of the oil pan. The bolt came out. But the nut was not welded corectly to the oil pan, so the nut fell off. The bolt comes out and there was no way to hold the oil in the pan. So we had to take the engine pack out and replace it,” he said… The Pentagon transports them by air in order to meet the high demand, adding a 10-percent premium to the vehicle’s cost… On a 747 freighter, there are just centimeters of clearance between the M-ATVs and the plane’s sides. In combat, the frontline soldiers don’t care about the M-ATV’s logistical burden. They only care that it’s safer and better-protected than other vehicles.”

July 2/10: C4ISR/Power kits. An $8.75 million firm-fixed-price contract for 1,750 kits (Command, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance suite and battery upgrade/silent watch) for Operation Enduring Freedom upgrades on the M-ATV. The silent watch kits allow M-ATV crews to run the vehicle’s advanced sensors and other electronics, without having to run the engine all the time in order to handle the current. That makes less noise, which is a big tactical improvement. It also saves fuel, in an environment where it costs $7 in fuel just to haul $1 worth of fuel to the front lines.

Work is to be performed in Oshkosh, Wis., with an estimated completion date of May 31/12. TACOM solicited 5 bids, with 5 bids received (W56HZV-09-D-0111). See also Feb 19/10 entry.

June 1/10: Check-6. A trio of contracts worth about $46.6 million, covering the purchase and installation of 3,137 Check-6 rear view sensor systems to the M-ATV. Note that Check-6 is a BAE Systems product. In all cases, the estimated completion date is May 31/12. Five bids were solicited for the original contract, with 5 bids received (W56HZV-09-D-0111).

A $20.8 million firm-fixed-price contract for 1,400 systems. Work will performed in Oshkosh, WI.

A $15.5 million firm-fixed-price contract for 1,039 systems. Work will performed in Oshkosh, WI.

A $10.4 million firm-fixed-price contract for 698 systems. Work will be performed in Oshkosh, WI (50%), and McConnellsburg, PA (50%).

May 20/10: RPG kits. A $72.7 million firm-fixed-price contract for 1,460 M-ATV protection kits, designed to defend against the basic rocket propelled grenade anti-tank weapons. It also includes spares: 45 M-ATV prescribed loads lists and 8 deprocessing spares sets. Work is to be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of May 31/12. Five bids were solicited for the original contract, with 5 bids received (W56HZV-09-D-0111).

May 20/10: EFP kits. A $68.9 million firm-fixed-price contract for 509 explosively formed penetrator protection kits, and 12 months of an M-ATV field service representative in the continental U.S. EFPs are specially-shaped mines that are best thought of as an instant, one-shot cannon attack. The shaped charge creates a metal dart when it explodes, and fires it into the side or bottom of a vehicle.

Work is to be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of May 31/12. Five bids were solicited with 5 bids received (W56HZV-09-D-0111).

May 19/10: RPG kits. $93.2 million in firm-fixed-price contract orders for another 2,401 M-ATV protection kits, designed to defend against the basic rocket propelled grenade anti-tank weapons that are common in Afghanistan.

The day’s announcements divide the purchase into a $21.5 million firm-fixed-price contract for another 554 kits, and $71.7 million for another 1,847 kits. Work is to be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of May 31/12. TACOM, CCTA-ADCA in Warren, MI solicited 5 bids, with 5 bids received (W56HZV-09-D-0111).

April 27/10: Support. Oshkosh Defense announces a pair of awards for more than $19 million from the U.S. Army TACOM Life Cycle Management Command (LCMC), to provide in-theater support for MRAP All-Terrain Vehicles (M-ATV) in Afghanistan. See the $9.3 million April 9/10 award for 29 Field Service Representatives; this announcement implies a similar 2nd award, as it describes “an additional 60 Oshkosh field service representatives (FSR) that will provide support in Afghanistan through May 2011.” See also Oshkosh Defense release.

April 20/10: CROWDS prep. An $11.1 million “firm-fixed-price contract for the procurement of 1,037 Remote Weapon System / Crew Remote Operated Weapons System final production configuration for the Mine Resistant Ambush All Terrain Vehicle.”

What this actually means is that they’re paying Oshkosh Defense to set their M-ATV patrol vehicles up so that everything is in place to accept a CROWS remotely-operated gun system: power, electronic interlinks, structural support, etc. The CROWS systems themselves are provided independently, as Government-Furnished Equipment. US Army TACOM in Warren, MI says that 5 bids were solicited, with 5 bids received (W56HZV-09-D-0111). See also Oshkosh Defense release.

April 14/10: RPG kits. A $68.7 million firm-fixed-price contract for 1,770 rocket propelled grenade protection kits. Oshkosh will install these kits on the production lines, and the Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command (SPAWAR) will install the kits on previously delivered vehicles. Work is to be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of May 31/12. Five bids were solicited with 5 bids received by US Army TACOM, CCTA-ADCA in Warren, MI (W56HZV-09-D-0111). See also Oshkosh Defense release.

April 9/10: Support. A $9.3 million firm-fixed-price contract covers 29 field service representatives and 348 person-months of M-ATV services to support Afghan operations. Work will be complete in May 31/12. Five bids were solicited with 5 bids received (W56HZV-09-D-0111).

March 26/10: RPG kits. A $41.9 million firm-fixed-price contract for 1,080 rocket propelled grenade protection kits. Work is to be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of May 31/12. Five bids were solicited with 5 bids received by US Army TACOM, AMSCC-ASCA in Warren, MI (W56HZV-09-D-0111).

March 26/10: Check 6. BAE Systems announces a $45 million multi-year contract to provide Oshkosh with Check-6 rear-view camera lights to equip 2,399 M-ATVs. See Dec 29/09 entry for the original contract.

March 22/10: Canada. Oshkosh Defense and General Dynamics Land Systems-Canada announce that they’ll offer Oshkosh’s blast-resistant M-ATV for Canada’s 500-600 vehicle TAPV competition, and Oshkosh’s Medium Tactical Vehicle Replacement (MTVR) trucks in Canada’s Medium Support Vehicle System (MSVS-SMP) truck program. Both vehicle types use Oshkosh’s proprietary TAK-4 independent suspension system, for off-road mobility. This consortium is considered to be a leading contender, in part because of GDLS’ existing armored vehicle plant in London, ON.

Oshkosh will serve as the prime contractor for both programs. General Dynamics Land Systems Canada will provide systems integration and testing support for the vehicles, as well as the complete spectrum of in-country sustainment support. Oshkosh uses Valley Associates to provide marketing and business development in Canada, which is why the vehicles display in the Valley Associates booth during CANSEC 2010 in June. Oshkosh | CANSEC announcement | Defence Watch.

UPDATE: Oshkosh lost to a heavier variant of Textron’s M1117.

March 10/10: CROWS prep. Oshkosh Corp. in Oshkosh, WI receives a $10.4 million firm-fixed-price contract for 1,401 M-ATV RWS kits that will let the vehicles support CROWS remote weapon systems. CROWS systems pack advanced sensors and machine guns, and can be controlled from inside the vehicle using a joystick and screen.

Work is to be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of May 31/12. TACOM, CCTA-ADCA in Warren, MI solicited 5 bids, with 5 bids received (W56HZV-09-D-0111). See also Oshkosh Defense release.

March 5/10: Support. Oshkosh Defense announces 3 awards valued at more than $35 million in total for M-ATV upgrades and in-theater support.

They include 2 awards totaling more than 6,400 M-ATV Self Protection Adaptive Roller Kits (SPARKS) upgraded interface brackets. The brackets allow soldiers to attach advance mine rollers to the vehicles. The US government has requested changes to SPARKS, and the new brackets will allow the upgraded systems to be fitted on M-ATVs. Upgrade kits will be shipped to the Defense Distribution Depot Red River in Texarkana, TX, in June 2010. The government will then ship the brackets to receiving units in theater for installation.

Those installations will be supported by an expanded roster of field service representatives (FSR) in-theater. A 3rd contract will place 18 additional Oshkosh in Afghanistan, and 6 in Iraq, at bases that require them. U.S. Army TACOM Life Cycle Management Command (LCMC) manages these contracts.

Feb 24/10: Oshkosh unveils 2 new M-ATV variants at the AUSA 2010 convention: an ambulance variant, and a utility variant designed to haul cargo. Oshkosh release

Feb 23/10: +1,460. A $640 million contract for 1,460 M-ATVs. Oshkosh says it has received awards valued at more than $4.74 bilion for 8,079 M-ATVs, as well as spare parts kits and aftermarket in-theater support.

Work is to be performed in Oshkosh, WI with an estimated completion date of May 2012. Five bids were solicited with 5 bids received (W56HZV-09-D-0111).

Israel’s Plasan secured a $170 million subcontract from Oshkosh to supply vehicle protection kits for the 1,460 M-ATVs, the Israeli newspaper Haaretz reports. The subcontract brings to 5,000 the number of vehicles Plasan has armored for the Americans since June 2009, for total revenues of $586 million. All told, Plasan has sold $940 million worth of armor kits to the U.S. military, for 8,079 vehicles. Oshkosh release | Ha’aretz report.

Feb 19/10: C4ISR/Power Retrofits. A $52.1 million firm-fixed-price contract for 1,451 retrofit kits for command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance suite and battery upgrade/silent watch. Oshkosh says the total potential order is more than 2,090 upgrade kits, which will include communications hardware, jammer systems, tracking technology, driver vision enhancement for safer operation at night, and the aforementioned “silent watch” capability.

The latter item points to an ongoing issue with advanced long range day/night sensors in overwatch roles, and modern communications gear. They often consume so much power that engines have to be kept running, just to power all of the electronics. That’s fuel-expensive, in a theater where it takes $7 in fuel to deliver $1 worth to the front lines. It also tends to remove tactical surprise in key situations, especially in already-difficult urban terrain.

Work is to be performed in Ishkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of May 31/12. Five bids were solicted with 5 bids received by TACOM in Warren, MI (W56HZV-09-D-0111). Oshkosh release.

Feb 5/10: EFP kits. A $84.7 million firm-fixed-price contract for the partial exercise of the option for 627 M-ATV explosively formed penetrator (EFP) kits. The Oshkosh-supplied kits will include EFP armor to protect against those shaped-charge land mines, base door armor, and a door-assist mechanism.

Delivery of the kits is expected to begin in April 2010, and be complete by the end of August 2010. The add-on armor kits will include EFP armor, base door armor and a door-assist mechanism.

Work is to be performed in Oshkosh, WI with an estimated completion date of May 31/12. 5 bids were solicited with 5 bids received (W56HZV-09-D-0111). Oshkosh Defense release

Jan 25/10: Support. Oshkosh announces 2 delivery orders valued at $325.7 million from the U.S. Army TACOM LCMC to supply spare parts and repair kits for the MRAP All-Terrain Vehicle (M-ATV). Deliveries are expected to begin in August 2010, and to be complete by the end of January 2011. DefenseLINK breaks down the orders as:

A $258.2 million firm-fixed-price contract to exercise the option for 90 lots of authorized stockage list kits, 90 lots of prescribed load list kits, 23 each deprocessing spare kits, and 132 lots battle damage repair kits for the M-ATV. Work is to be performed in Oshkosh, WI (50%) and McConnellsburg, PA, with an estimated completion date of May 31/12. Five bids were solicited with 5 bids received by TACOM, CCTA-ADC-A in Warren, MI (W56HZV-09-D-0111).

A $67.5 million firm-fixed-price contract for a partial exercise of an option: 2 lots of authorized stockage list kits, 2 lots of prescribed load list kits, and 65 lots of battle damage repair kits for the M-ATV. Work is to be performed in Oshkosh, WI (50%) and McConnellsburg, PA, with an estimated completion date of May 31/12. Five bids were solicited with 5 bids received by TACOM, CCTA-ADC-A in Warren, MI (W56HZV-09-D-0111).

To date, Oshkosh says it has received awards valued at more than $3.9 billion to deliver 6,619 M-ATVs, as well as spare kits and aftermarket in-theater support.

Jan 21/10: Support. Oshkosh announces 4 awards from the US Defense Logistics Agency, valued at $89 million, for its M-ATVs and FHTV heavy trucks.

Oshkosh will supply M-ATV spare parts, including engines, transmissions, transfer cases and alternators. Work under the orders is expected to be completed by October 2010. Oshkosh is providing the M-ATV’s spare parts to the DLA to be used as in-the-field replacements after the original vehicle parts have been consumed. These parts will ship without delay, to help maintain readiness rates in theater. Discussions with Oshkosh representatives indicate that the M-ATV orders are worth about $50 million.

Jan 6/10: Radios. Harris Corp.’s RF Communications Division in Rochester, NY received orders totaling $119 million to supply Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS)-approved Falcon III AN/PRC-152-C handheld radios with the RF-5980-SA001 vehicle amplifier adapters for the Mine Resistent Ambush Protected (MRAP) all-terrain vehicle (M-ATV).

Separate contracts for items like these help illustrate what is meant by the term “government furnished equipment.” The AN/PRC-152 [PDF] provides M-ATV users with multiband Single Channel Ground and Airborne Radio System (SINCGARS) and Demand Assigned Multiple Access (DAMA) satellite communications interoperability in the 30-512 MHz frequency bands. It is just one aspect of the communication suite that equips each M-ATV.

Jan 6/10: Delivery options. At a Pentagon press conference, Press Secretary Geoff Morrell provides an update regarding the M-ATV program. He says that higher-capacity sealift options aren’t being considered for getting M-ATVs that currently sit in the USA into Afghanistan (via Karachi or Gwadar, Pakistan, then overland), even though the drawdown from Iraq and surge to Afghanistan are straining available transport capacity:

“We are at now, as of January the 5th – and I want to double-check these – we were at 239 [M-ATVs] delivered, 164 fielded, 12 awaiting transport. And then there are obviously many more vehicles than that that have been produced. And as they vie for space for airlift and absorption in Afghanistan, they are being used, many of them, for training purposes domestically.

But we are now, as we are in the midst of this surge, going to be dealing with this herculean effort of trying to get not just 30,000 additional forces over to Afghanistan, but getting all their equipment as well. So this is going to be a real — a real test of our TRANSCOM [Transportation Command] folks, as well as CENTCOM. And they have a priority list based, you know, in terms of space available, what has the top priority to flow in at what time.

I can tell you this. It’s our goal that come this spring, we’ll be sending over about 500 a month.

Q. So when would sealift begin? Is it this —

MR. MORRELL: I couldn’t – no, I don’t think we would do – I don’t think we’re at the point where we’d do sealift, but we can check on that for you.”

Dec 29/09: Check-6 install. Oshkosh Corp. in Oshkosh, WI receives a $33.9 million firm-fixed-price contract. This contract is for a change order modification for 2,277 Check-6 rear view sensor systems, to be fitted to M-ATV vehicles (q.v. March 26/10, Dec 29/09 entries). BAE’s Check-6 tail-light duplicates a feature found in some civilian cars, which uses a rear camera to show the rear of the vehicle and objects behind it on a screen. Unlike civilian camera-screen combinations, however, Check-6 tail lights are derived from BAE Systems’ expertise with weapon sights. They work in infrared as well as visible light, making them useful for noticing people as well as obstacles, and improving awareness in darkness, sandstorms, and other difficult situations. They install as a complete tail-light assembly, and require no drilling or welding.

Work is to be performed in Oshkosh, WI (50%), and McConnellsburg, PA (50%), with an estimated contract completion date of May 31/12. Work is actually expected to begin in March 2010, and be complete in May 2010. Five bids were solicited, with 5 bids received by TACOM, AMSCC-TAC-ADCA in Warren, MI (W56HZV-09-D-0111). See also Oct 2/09 entry, plus Oshkosh release | “Check 6! Now a Possibility for Vehicles, Too.”

Dec 28/09: Sub-contractors. Ceradyne in Costa Mesa, CA announces that it received a multi-million dollar blanket purchase order from Plasan Sasa Ltd. in Israel for the production of armor components for the MRAP All Terrain Vehicle (M-ATV). Ceradyne plans to produce these parts in its expanded armor assembly plant in Irvine, CA for delivery to prime contractor Oshkosh to assemble the components and deliver the M-ATV to the government.

All manufacturing procedures for these M-ATV components have been approved, and Ceradyne production commenced this month. It is anticipated that production and delivery will continue throughout 2010.

Dec 24/09: Support. Oshkosh receives a maximum $22.2 million total set-aside, sole-source, undefinitized delivery-order contract for M-ATV sustainment spare parts. The date of performance completion is Oct 2/10. The Defense Logistics Agency in Warren, MI manages the contract (W56HZV-09-D-0111-VD01).

Dec 24/09: EFP kits. Oshkosh Defense announces an order from the U.S. Army Tank-automotive and Armaments Command Life Cycle Management Command (TACOM LCMC) to supply “more than 170” M-ATV explosively formed penetrator (EFP) armoring kits through April 2010, and 800 rocket-propelled grenade (RPG) kits through May 2010.

Uncharacteristically, Oshkosh’s release comes in advance of the Dec 29/09 Pentagon DefenseLINK announcement, which cites a $54.3 million firm-fixed-price contract for 800 RPG armoring kits and 172 EFP kits as “the partial exercise of an option.” It offers May 31/12 as the formal end of contract date. Five bids were solicited, with 1 bid received by US Army TACOM’s AMSCC-TAC-ADCA in Warren, MI (W56HZV-09-D-0111). Oshkosh Defense is teamed with Plasan North America to provide the M-ATV’s armoring solutions.

The US military, and its contractors, will not discuss details regarding these kits. EFPs are a form of land mine that uses the explosion to form a slug from its copper lining, creating what is in effect an impromptu tank sabot shell that fires into the victim vehicle. Rocket Propelled Grenades like the ubiquitous RPG-7 are bazooka-like anti-tank rockets with a shaped charge warhead. The RPG threat are usually addressed by “cage armor” slats like BAE’s LROD, which are not 100% effective, or by Explosive Reactive Armor tile sets that are shaped to fit the vehicle. Less conventional approaches like Tarian cloth armoring are also beginning to emerge.

Dec 22/09: Industrial. Oshkosh announces that it has reached the production rate of 1,000 M-ATV vehicles per month, ahead of schedule. The milestone was reached on Dec 18/09, and Oshkosh reached the milestone by using production capacity at existing manufacturing facilities in Oshkosh, WI and McConnellsburg, PA. Production will continue at this rate of 1,000+ vehicles per month through May 2010, when all current orders would be filled.

Dec 10/09: +400. A $175.4 million firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract exercises an option on Delivery Order #0003, and buys another 400 M-ATV vehicles and associated basic items. Work is to be performed in Oshkosh, WI (50%), and McConnellsburg, PA (50%), with a formal contract completion date of May 31/12. The original contract solicited 5 bids, and received 5 (W56HZV-09-D-0111). This is the option mentioned in the Nov 11/09 entry.

To date, Oshkosh has received 6 awards valued at about $3.33 billion; when a contract for 25 test vehicles is included, they will deliver a total of 6,644 M-ATVs. The company has ramped up production to achieve 1,000 vehicles per month in December 2009, and this new award will extend production into May 2010. See also Oshkosh release.

Nov 19/09: Training. The way Army vehicles must be driven, and where they must be driven, means that the ability to get out of a vehicle quickly matters almost as much as what the vehicle can do for while you’re in it. Oshkosh Defense announces received a $5.6 million firm-fixed-price contract from the U.S. Army for the procurement of 26 “egress trainer cabin modules” for the Oshkosh M-ATV, and initial spare parts for a stateside training and certification standard program.

The modules are simulators that can train soldiers to get out of an M-ATV vehicle, even if it is flipped or in otherwise abnormal situations. a shift in Army thinking has encouraged M-ATV training to take place stateside versus in theater. The M-ATV cabin modules will be manufactured at the company’s facilities in McConnellsburg, PA.

Nov 19/09: Industrial. Oshkosh meets the November M-ATV production requirement ahead of schedule, marking the 5th consecutive month. Oshkosh says that it will continue to increase production to meet December’s requirement of 1,000 vehicles, with output remaining at that high level through April 2010.

Nov 11/09: +1,000. Oshkosh announces an additional $438 million, 1,000 vehicle order from the U.S. Army Tank-automotive and Armaments Command Life Cycle Management Command (TACOM LCMC). This is the 5th award Oshkosh has received to supply M-ATVs, and brings total orders to 6,219 vehicles and more than $3.2 billion. An option for 400 more M-ATVs and Basic Items of Issue is also included in this delivery order, which would bring the production total to 6,619.

Nov 11th is the Veteran’s Day holiday, so the Pentagon doesn’t announce the firm-fixed-price contract until Nov 12/09. Work is to be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of May 31/12. Five bids were solicited in the original contract, with 5 bids received by the U.S. Army TACOM Contracting Center AMSTA-TAC-ATBC in Warren, MI (W56HZV-09-D-0111).

Nov 11/09: Sub-contractors. BAE Systems announces a “multi-million dollar” sub-contract from Plasan North America to provide M-ATV armoring kit components. Work on the contract will begin this month at BAE Systems’ production facilities in Fairfield, OH. Tony Russell, president of BAE Systems’ Security & Survivability business, said:

“The partnership between BAE Systems and Plasan represents the first of what we believe will be many collaborative efforts between our two companies.”

Nov 10/09: Industrial. Oshkosh announces that it beat October 2009’s M-ATV delivery schedule of 385 vehicles, producing more than 435 vehicles during that month. This marks the 4th consecutive month Oshkosh has beaten the schedule, as it ramps up toward a planned production rate of 1,000 vehicles per month.

Oct 28/09: 2010 budget. President Obama signs the FY 2010 defense budget. That budget includes $6.656 billion in funding for MRAP vehicles, $1.2 billion above the Pentagon’s original request. Significant chunks of that funding will be devoted to M-ATV purchases. White House | House-
Senate Conference Report summary [PDF] & tables [PDF] | Pentagon AFPS article.

Oct 27/09: Support. Oshkosh announces 2 M-ATV contracts valued at more than $28 million. They include a $16 million contract from the U.S. Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) for spare parts, and a $12 million contract from rom the U.S. Army Tank-automotive and Armaments Command Life Cycle Management Command (TACOM LCMC) for field service representatives (FSR) to support the M-ATV program in-theater through September 2010.

Oshkosh expects to complete production of the current M-ATV contract for 5,219 vehicles in March 2010.

Oct 22/09: An initial 8 M-ATVs arrive in Kandahar by aerial transport. These vehicles will be used to train drivers and mechanics from units selected to receive M-ATVs.

Note that earlier Pentagon announcements indicated M-ATVs in theater at the end of September, whereas this release places the initial use date into late October and tags it as a training set. One possibility is that the initial shipments were Special Forces vehicles. Another is that this announcement refers only to one Afghan sector, and that eastern sectors may have received the vehicles first. Pentagon DVIDS.

Oct 12/09: Australia. Oshkosh announces that it will be submitting its M-ATV and Sandcat vehicles for Australia’s PMV-L component of Overlander. Their partners in these 2 proposals are Plasan SASA, Ltd., who supplies the armoring solutions for both vehicles and developed the Sandcat/ Caracal; and local Oshkosh division JLG Australia, who will assist in manufacturing the vehicles and handle through-life support.

Australia has also indicated that they will be continuing onto the next phase of the American JLTV competition, which does not presently include these Oshkosh vehicles. This is for the made-in-Asutralia option.

UPDATE: Oshkosh lost to Thales Australia’s Hawkei as the made-in-Australia contender.

Oct 9/09: +923. Oshkosh Corp. in Oshkosh, WI receives a $408.4 million firm-fixed-price contract for procurement of another 923 MRAP All Terrain Vehicles (M-ATVs) and aftermarket parts package that includes basic issue items. This brings total announced M-ATV orders to $2.76 billion for the full expected amount of 5,244 vehicles – a total that includes unannounced government orders for 25 test vehicles.

Work is to be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion date of May 31/12. The company plans to ramp production up to 1,000 vehicles per month in December 2009, and continue at that level through at least March 2010. Five bids were solicited for the original contract, with 5 bids received by TACOM, AMSCC-TAC-ADCA in Warren, MI (W56HZV-09-D-0111). See also: Oshkosh release.

Oct 5/09: Sub-contractors. SCHOTT DiamondView Armor Products LLC exhibits its DiamondView transparent armor window technology at AUSA. The DiamondView windows were selected for Oshkosh’s M-ATVs, and use a transparent glass-ceramic combination. It is hoped that DiamondView windows will be able to reduce lifecycle costs normally associated with windows delaminating, discoloring or peeling. The firm has been a defense industry supplier for 40 years, and currently holds world records for producing the world’s thinnest piece of glass (0.025mm, for medical technology and electronics), and the world’s largest piece of glass (8m tall, for astronomy).

In order to fill the Oshkosh contract, SCHOTT DAP has ramped up manufacturing at both its Boothwyn, PA and Vincennes, IN production facilities. The Vincennes/ now County facility currently processes and finishes glass-ceramic cooktops and flat glass for the home appliance industry, but the firm will invest $7.2 million over the next few years to add the transparent armor line. The Indiana Economic Development Corporation offered SCHOTT North America up to $2.32 million in performance-based tax credits and up to $50,000 in training grants based on the company’s job creation plans, and the city of Vincennes will consider additional property tax abatement at the request of the Knox County Development Corporation. Hiring is underway, and the company expects to add more than 200 employees at peak production. SCHOTT DiamondView release | SCHOTT Vincennes release.

Oct 2/09: Check-6. Oshkosh announces a $33 million award from the U.S. Army Tank-automotive and Armaments Command Life Cycle Management Command (TACOM LCMC) to supply a rear mounted, infrared-enabled camera system on more than 2,200 MRAP All Terrain Vehicles (M-ATV).

The camera system has been deployed on other MRAPs. It integrates with existing vehicle video displays to provide a 40-degree vertical and 54-degree horizontal field of view. The system uses an infrared camera core in an LED-equipped tailgate assembly, and provides visibility through dust, obscurants and incremental weather in day and night operations. We all know drivers who could use one of these; on a battlefield they can save your life, as well as your vehicle bumper.

Oct 2/09: Industrial. A release from the Marines says that M-ATV vehicles have started to flow from Oshkosh to US Navy Space and Naval Warfare (SPAWAR) Systems Center (SSC) Atlantic. Oshkosh delivers the base vehicle, but modern military vehicles have a wide array of electronics and equipment to install, from jammers, to radios and other communications devices, to weapons like RWS turrets. The cost adds up, and so does the time required to install everything. According to M-ATV Joint Program Executive Officer, Marine Corps Brig. Gen. Michael Brogan, they’re using lessons learned from the MRAP program to speed up delivery to the front lines – something that became a problem early in the MRAP program:

“We were able to feed back to Oshkosh specific bracketry, racks and cabling so all that can be installed in the vehicle during manufacture; which means we dont have to do it at SPAWAR. The goal was to push as much of that work that was getting done at SPAWAR, particularly the touch labor, upstream into the manufacturing process. Because we knew it going into this, we were able to include it into the design. That clearly is one of the lessons learned from Baseline MRAP that will speed the process at Charleston.”

Oct 1/09: Industrial. Oshkosh announces that they have exceeded M-ATV delivery requirements for the 3rd consecutive month. The September 2009 production target of 100 vehicles was met on Sept 22/09.

Sept 14/09: +352. Oshkosh Corp. in Oshkosh, WI receives a $189.1 million firm-fixed-price IDIQ contract for another 352 MRAP All Terrain Vehicles, and aftermarket parts packages that include Basic Issue items (35 LLO), Authorized Stockage (14 LO), Prescribed Load (14 LO), and Battle Damage and Repairs (14 LO). This brings total announced M-ATV orders to $2.31 billion for 4,296 vehicles.

Work is to be performed in Oshkosh, WI, with an estimated completion of May 31/12. Five bids were solicited, with 5 bids received by TACOM, AMSCC-TAC-ADCA in Warren, MI (W56HZV-09-D-0111). See also Oshkosh release.

July 31/09: +1,700. Oshkosh Corp. in Oshkosh, WI receives another M-ATV order. The $1.064 billion firm-fixed-price contract modification exercises an option for another 1,700 M-ATVs, Field Service Representative Support, and associated parts support packages to include Authorized Stockage Lists (ASL), Prescribed Load List (PLL), Reprocessing Spares, Battle Damage Repair parts (BDR) and Basic Issue Items (BII).

This order raises its total to $2.12 billion for 3,924 vehicles. They also announce that Oshkosh has exceeded the July 2009 delivery schedule of 45 M-ATVs by delivering 46.

Vehicles will be provided to the US Marine Corps, Army, Special Operations Command and US military testing. Vehicles and parts support packages will be fielded to Afghanistan in support of Operation Enduring Freedom. Field Service Representatives will be providing support in Kuwait and Afghanistan.

Work is to be performed in McConnellsburg, PA, with an estimated completion date of July 31, 2010. U.S. Army TACOM LCMC in Warren, MI manages this contract (W56HZV-09-D-0111, delivery order #0002, modification 02).

June 30/09: Navistar and Force Protection both announce their disappointment at their M-ATV loss, while reiterating their firms’ strong points for investors.

June 2/09: The Pentagon’s Joint Requirements Oversight Council approves a plan for 5,244 M-ATVs to the US Army (2,598), Marine Corps (1,565), Special Operations Command (643), US Air Force (280) and the Navy (65). An additional 93 vehicles would be set aside for testing. Source.

May 15/09: USMC Commandant General James T. Conway speaks at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) think tank. An excerpt [PDF]:

“We are seeing an increasing sophistication on the part of the IED [land mines]… We are looking at an MRAP ha has greater off road capability because you do not have the road network hat you have in Iraq. You become fairly predictable, fairly easy to plot if you’re always going to be on those roads. Our MRAPs, and we have about 2,000 of them plus in the Marine Corps, don’t do that well off road. Now the favorite vehicle in Afghanistan today is the seven-ton truck, the MTVR. In an innovative fashion, our engineers and our people at Quantico said, let’s put the suspension of the MTVR on our CAT-1 MRAPs and see how it does. Well, it did pretty well… Now, when we went to blow it up it did not perform do well because we created additional space and surface area underneath the vehicle. We have now blown it up three times. The third time looked pretty good… We will have it in the hands of our troops potentially by mid-summer. It will cut cost. For the long-term utility of our CAT-I [4×4] MRAPs, which is mostly what we own… we have a much more multi-capable vehicle for the long term.

We are not divorcing ourselves from the MATV program at this point… We are going to follow both with interest, and we will see where we want to park our monies and our effort as both these vehicles continue to mature.”

May 4/09: The Force Dynamics partnership announces their delivery of 3 additional production M-ATV Cheetah vehicles to the U.S. Army Aberdeen Test and Evaluation Center.

The release adds that Force Dynamics, LLC and Raytheon have agreed to provide a comprehensive command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance system (C4ISR) plug-and-play ready architecture for the M-ATV Cheetah, using the C4ISR Department of Defense Architecture Framework (DoDAF). It provides immediate access to services including sophisticated radio switching, networked video, navigation systems, Blue Force Tracking, Counter-Radio Controlled Improvised Explosive Device (RCIED) Electronic Warfare, and weapons systems.

Under the original MRAP program, vehicles required extensive modifications, integration, and testing to fully integrate various C4SIR configurations. This new architecture is designed to make that process much simpler.

The system is also designed to assist with remote monitoring of integrated vehicle and C4ISR systems via one monitoring platform, to offer complete systems status in real time. Remote data transfer, monitoring of platform usage, and capture of failure information are all part of that element, and each M-ATV Cheetah is registered in Raytheon’s Force Logistics System II, which is electronically integrated to the DoD’s current force support systems.

May 1/09: BAE Systems’ entries pass initial testing, as it receives a follow-on contract for 3 more GTS M-ATVs and 3 more USCS M-ATV test vehicles of each type. Other firms that have passed testing and received orders for 3 more vehicles include Force Protection’s Cheetah, Navistar’s Husky, and Oshkosh’s entry.

April 2/09: Navistar Defense, LLC is in discussions with the government over a technicality in the evaluation of the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) All Terrain Vehicle (M-ATV) program. Navistar was required to formalize its request for a review of the evaluation within a certain period of time, and wants its vehicle to be considered for M-ATV. Navistar release.

March 11/09: A Bloomberg report quotes General Dynamics spokesman Ken Yamashita, who said that their M-ATV offer, based on its RG-31 partnership with BAE, “was not accepted… He didn’t say why, and Pentagon spokeswoman Cheryl Irwin said she couldn’t comment.”

That failure still leaves GDLS in contention, via the Force Dynamics partnership’s Cheetah vehicle.

March 6/09: Oshkosh Defense announces a $1 million contract with the U.S. Army Tank-automotive and Armaments Command (TACOM) for government purchase of the 2 production-ready Oshkosh M-ATVs that were delivered on Feb. 23rd. This contract award is one of the required phases in the U.S. military’s evaluation of M-ATV submissions, and is awarded after the delivered vehicles are certified to meet the government’s initial design requirements.

All other M-ATV candidates also receive these awards, with 1 exception – General Dynamics (see March 11/09).

Feb 23/09: M-ATV candidate vehicles are due from vendors for 2 months of testing and evaluation. Several of them announce deliveries on this day: BAE Systems, Force Protection ($1 million contract), Navistar, and Oshkosh.

Feb 19/09: An Oshkosh release claims that its M-ATV team can produce the military’s most probable delivery order of 2,080 M-ATVs “within months of an awarded contract.” The Oshkosh team says that it is able to produce several hundred to 1,000 M-ATVs on a monthly basis, and Oshkosh Defense President John Stoddart adds that:

“Oshkosh’s warm production lines coupled with our mature M-ATV design allow us to ramp up production of this vehicle without impacting our current military programs.”

Of course, the same is true for competitors like BAE and Navistar, both of whom have MRAP production lines that are closing out, and substantial military truck production lines that continue to run.

Jan 15/09: Force Protection, Inc. and General Dynamics Land Systems Inc.’s Force Dynamics, LLC joint venture has focused on delivering Cougar MRAP vehicles, but Force Protection’s Cheetah vehicle had been excluded – until now. The joint venture announces that it has submitted the Cheetah for the U.S. Army’s MRAP All Terrain Vehicle (M-ATV) solicitation.

The Cheetah began development in 2005 has completed Force Protection-sponsored blast testing at the Aberdeen Proving Grounds, MD, and initial mobility and durability testing at the Nevada Automotive Test Center. It has undergone a range of enhancements since it was first developed, including the addition of independent suspension. Force Protection is commencing low-rate production at Force Protection’s Ladson, SC plant.

Jan 9/09: Oshkosh Corporation submits its M-ATV proposal, based on the combat-proven Medium Tactical Vehicle Replacement (MTVR) medium truck chassis. The firm has produced about 10,000 of these trucks for the US Marine Corps, which have been deployed all over the world. Oshkosh release.

Additional Readings

• US FedBizOpps (Nov 13/08) – 23–JPO MRAP All Terrain Vehicle (M-ATV)
• TACOM – JPO MRAP All Terrain Vehicle (M-ATV). Competition page with all documents.
• Oshkosh Defense – Oshkosh M-ATV MRAP All Terrain Vehicle
• Oshkosh Defense – TAK-4 Independent Suspension
• Global Security – Medium Tactical Vehicle Replacement (MTVR)
• DID FOCUS – JLTV: Hummer v2.0, or MRAP Lite?
• James Hasik (Jan 17/14) – Between MRAPs and “a couple of Nobel Prizes” – reasonable priorities in armored vehicles in the US and the UK.
• IDGA (2010) – Dave Hansen of JPO MRAP on the M-ATV. Podcast interview.
• US Congressional Research Service (last update Aug 24/10) – Mine-Resistant, Ambush-Protected (MRAP) Vehicles: Background and Issues for Congress. Includes the M-ATV. Last update here [PDF].
• Voice of America (Aug 1/10) – For US Troops, New Armored Vehicle is Benefit, Burden. They do love the M-ATV, but there are a couple of design issues Oshkosh might want to look at.
• Oshkosh Defense (June 5/09) – Oshkosh Defense Global Aftermarket Capabilities Ready to Provide in-Theater M-ATV Support
• Motley Fool (May 7/09) – M-ATV Bids: The Pentagon Picks Its Winners
• Oshkosh Defense (Feb 26/09) – Mission-Proven Vehicle Components and Technologies Featured in Oshkosh M-ATV Vehicle Design
• Defense News (Dec 11/08) – In RfP, DoD Outlines Small-MRAP Needs
• WIRED Danger Room (Oct 16/08) – Afghanistan Diary: MRAPs Suck!

Navistar subsidiary International Military and Government LLC (IMG) in, Warrenville, IL has won billions of dollars in MRAP program contracts, to produce several variants of its blast-resistant vehicles. The Category I MRUV vehicle’s role is similar to a Hummer’s, albeit with more carrying capacity and much more protection. That has become a staple for IMG’s entry, dubbed the “MaxxPro” by its manufacturer. Their collaboration with an Israeli firm who provides up-armored vehicles for the Marines successfully overcame lukewarm initial interest, but even successful survivors of Aberdeen’s tests where challenged to offer enough protection against the ERP class of land mines that began to appear in Iraq.

Nevertheless, the MRAP program became a production race – and Navistar did very well under those competitive terms. In the end the military’s desire for standardization of its fleets exerted something of a gravitation pull on the competition. A July 2007 order vaulted Navistar into 1st place for initial MRAP Program vehicles ordered, but the US Army is divesting many of its vehicles – creating opportunities for foreign buyers…

MRAP Competitors, Navistar Totals

Navistar ended up leading the initial MRAP competition, with the highest share of any competitor at 38.3%. Additional orders for Afghan-adapted vehicles ensure that this total has crept higher vis-a-vis their original competitors, but They’re still just one competitor among many, and beyond the MRAP competition, trucking rival Oshkosh’s M-ATV has now achieved very close production figures in the follow-on, single-award M-ATV program.

To date, Navistar has produced 7 MaxxPro variants under contract: the original MaxxPro, MaxxPro Air Force, the MaxxPro Plus with improved protection, MaxxPro ambulance (production orders were for the Dash variant), MaxxPro MEAP, the MaxxPro Dash for Afghan operations, and the MaxxPro Recovery Vehicle (MRV), for towing out stuck vehicles. The firm has also developed Cargo flatbed and Tractor (18-wheeler truck’s front end, but mine-protected) variants.

A number of these MaxxPro vehicles have also received independent suspension upgrades, in order to improve their off-road performance. The MaxxPro DXM upgrade kits are delivered through Boler’s Hendrickson subsidiary, and marry Hendrickson’s advanced engineered sub-frames, sway-bars, coil springs and shocks with GD AxleTech’s 5000 Series Independent Suspension Axle System.

Participants in the MRAP and related programs, and their vehicles, have included:

Based on awarded contracts, MaxxPro’s price per base vehicle is around $520,000 – $550,000. The vehicles must then be fitted with electronics, IED jammers, and other equipment. That can add hundreds of thousands of dollars to that base price, before they’re sent to the front lines. Announced production orders to date include:

• #001: 4 initial testing vehicles
  
• #002: 1,200 MRAP CAT I vehicles
  
• #003: 16 larger MRAP CAT II vehicles
  
• #004: 754 CAT I
  
• #005: 1,000 CAT I
  
• #006: 1,500 CAT I
  
• #007: 743 CAT I
  
• #008: 4 CAT I – not publicly announced
  
• #009: 822 CAT I MaxxPro Dash
  
• #010: 400 CAT I MaxxPro Dash
  
• #014: 1,050 CAT I MaxxPro Dash DXM with improved suspensions. Modification added 1,222 DXM retrofits.
  
• #015: 250 MaxxPro MRV recovery/tow variants
  
• #016: 175 CAT I MaxxPro Dash DXM with ECP I/II
  
• #018: 250 MaxxPro Dash Ambulance with DXM and ECP IV
  
• #019?: 471 MaxxPro Dash DXM with ECPs
  
• #020: ISS retrofit kits: 650 DXM Plus
  
• #021: 140 MaxxPro MRV recovery/tow variants
  
• #023: Full “rolling chassis” retrofits: 2,717

Total production is currently 8,779 vehicles. Beyond American buys, Navistar informs DID that their production totals include a 2009 order from Singapore for 15 MaxxPro Dash vehicles, and they have also announced a May 2010 order for a pool of 80 MaxxPro Dash vehicles to support “coalition forces” in Afghanistan, which has reportedly included Albania, Croatia, Estonia, Greece, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Solvakia, and South Korea.

As the USA withdrew from Iraq and Afghanistan, they decided not to keep many of their MRAP vehicles. Quite a few Oshkosh M-ATVs and Navistar MaxxPros will still remain in the force, but many MRAPs of all types won’t remain. The question is where they end up. Some have been destroyed outright, in order to avoid paying to ship them home. A number of MRAPs, including MaxxPros, have been diverted to local government organizations in the USA. Giving mine-protected, heavily armored vehicles to entities like school districts and non-violent towns of under 10,000 people has caused no small amount of controversy, and citizen protests have even forced a small handful of local governments to cancel these “1033 program” giveaways, which are not centrally tracked or accounted for. Other MRAPs have been given or sold to foreign operators, reportedly including:

• Croatia: 40
  
• Hungary: 42
  
• Jordan: 100
  
• Pakistan: 22 deployed, 160 requested
  
• Slovakia: ??
  
• UAE: 3,375 requested

A Note on MRAPs

DID refers to the MaxxPro as the top finisher in the MRAP competition, despite greater sales by Oshkosh’s M-ATV (MRAP All-Terrain Vehicle).

That’s because the M-ATV wasn’t part of the initial MRAP program; instead, it’s a follow-on competition that aimed to bridge the gap to the future JLTV winner. Navistar’s MaxxPro competed, but Oshkosh won, and their M-ATV was also very popular. In June 2010, its order totals narrowly surpassed the Navistar MaxxPro’s. DID defines “MRAP orders” as orders placed under the original MRAP multi-vendor contracts, however, and considers the single-vendor M-ATV competition to be a separate but related effort.

MaxxPro Contracts & Key Events

Unless otherwise specified, all contracts are issued to Navistar subsidiary International Military and Government LLC (now Navistar Defense LLC) in Warrenville, IL. Unless otherwise noted, the Marine Corps Systems Command in Quantico, VA buys MRAP vehicles on behalf of 2008 requests from the US Army (12,000 by 2008), USMC (2,225), Air Force (558), Navy (544), SOCOM (344), and production verification testing (100). Those numbers rose further, via additional awards in 2010 and 2011, but the US military

March 12/17: Navistar has been contracted more than $475 million by the US Contracting Command in order to produce and support 40 armored vehicles for Pakistan and to upgrade 1,085 armored vehicles for the United Arab Emirates. The vehicles destined for Pakistan later this year are the company’s MaxxPro Dash DXM Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicle which features an armored wheeled vehicle with a V-shaped hull to deflect mine blasts. For the UAE, Navistar will provide the long wheel base MaxxPro MRAPs which are being acquired by the UAE under the US Excess Articles program and will be delivered in 2018.

February 19/17: Navistar Defense has been contracted $35 million by the US DoD to provide 40 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected MaxxPro Dash DXM vehicles. The deal supports foreign military sales for the government of Pakistan and work is expected to be complete by the end of October 2018. MaxxPro Dash DXM vehicles feature a V-shaped hull to deflect IED explosions away from the vehicle and are built to withstand ballistic arms fire and mine blasts. Pakistan will use the vehicles to protect troops against attacks from jihadist militants and other insurgents operating between Pakistan and Afghanistan.

September 11/15: US firm Navistar Defense has been contracted to supply the Afghan National Security Forces with nearly 2,300 mine resistant, ambush protected (MRAP) vehicles, based on the company’s 7000-MV platform, according to a company press release. The US Army Contracting Command handed the company a $369 million contract for the vehicles, which will bring the total number of Navistar vehicles sent to the Afghan government to nearly 9,000. The company has also exported the 7000-MV platform to Iraq. The new MRAPs will reportedly serve in a variety of roles, including ammunition, fuel and troop transport.

Sept 12/14: Ambulance upgrades. Navistar Defense LLC in Lisle, IL receives a $44 million contract modification to buy MaxxPro Long Wheeled Base Ambulance Medical Equipment Set A-Kits, MaxxPro Survivability Upgrade Kits, and Spring Suspension System Kits. All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2012 and FY 2014 US Army budgets.

Work is expected to finish by Aug 31/15, and will be performed in Lisle, IL. The US Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI manages the contract (W56HZV-12-G-0006, PO 0002).

July 25/14: Survivability upgrades. Navistar Defense LLC in Lisle, IL receives a $27.6 million contract modification for kits to upgrade MaxxPro Dash and long-wheel base ambulances to their final configuration. $21.7 million in FY 2012 and FY 2014 US Army budgets are committed immediately.

Work is expected to finish by May 30/15, and will be performed in Lisle, IL. The US Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI manages the contract (W56HZV-12-G-0006, PO 001).

Dec 23/13: Support. Navistar Defense LLC in Lisle, IL receives a $6.9 million contract modification for MaxxPro field service support in the continental United States and overseas. All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2014 US Army O&M budgets.

Work is expected to finish by Dec 31/14, and will be performed in Lisle, IL and Afghanistan. Bids were solicited via the Internet, with 1 received by US Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI (W56HZV-10-C-0011, PO 0086).

Nov 4/13: Support. Navistar Defense LLC in Lisle, IL receives a $7.3 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract, covering MaxxPro M1235A3 Dash MSU (MaxxPro Survivability Upgrade) engineering, logistic and travel support for the acquisition of the contract data requirements list, and program and logistics support. The contractor shall include MSU content as well as variation in vehicle content for both the objective gunner protection kit manned turret and M153 CROWS remote-controlled weapon turret. All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2013 US Army budgets.

Work will be performed in Lisle, IL, with an expected completion date of December 2014. One bid was solicited, with 1 received by the US Army TACOM in Warren, MI (W56HZV-10-C-0011). Note that the exact same award was announced on Oct 31/13.

June 18/13: Survivability upgrades. Navistar Defense LLC in Lisle, IL receives an $18.2 million firm-fixed-price contract modification, increasing the funds available for the MaxxPro Survivability Upgrade to $152.3 million. FY 2011 & 2012 Procurement funds are being used by Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI (W56HZV-12-C-0404, PO 0013).

June 3/13: Report. Navistar Defense LLC in Lisle, IL receives an $8.9 million cost-plus-fixed-fee, multi-year contract modification, for MaxxPro field services representatives. The cumulative total face value of this contract is now $49.8 million. Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI manages the contract (W56HZV-10-C-0011, PO 0071).

Jan 7/13: Survivability upgrades. Navistar Defense LLC in Lisle, IL receives a $10.6 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification for MaxxPro maintenance services.

Work will be performed in Lisle, IL; Yuma, AZ; Aberdeen, MD; and Afghanistan; with an estimated completion date of March 25/13. One bid was solicited, with one bid received by US Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI (W56HZV-10-C-0011).

Sept 24/12: Survivability upgrades. Navistar Defense LLC in Lisle, IL receives a $138.2 million firm-fixed-price contract modification to buy MaxxPro Survivability Upgrade Kits, Vehicle Emergency Egress Windows, and MaxxPro support services.

Work will be performed in Lisle and Springfield, OH, with an estimated completion date of Sept 13/13. One bid was solicited, with one bid received by US Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI (W56HZV-12-C-0404).

Sept 19/12: Survivability upgrades. Navistar Defense, LLC announces a maximum $282 million delivery order to provide more than 2,300 survivability upgrade retrofit kits for their MaxxPro Dash MRAP vehicles, plus parts and service. Work for the survivability upgrade will be done in Afghanistan beginning in December 2012, and is scheduled to be complete by July 2013.

Navistar says they have now delivered nearly 9,000 MaxxPro units in 9 major variants to all customers.

July 30/12: Spares. Navistar Defense in Lisle, IL receives a maximum $8.6 million fixed-price with economic price adjustment contract from the US Army for MaxxPro spares. Work will be performed in Illinois and Kentucky, using FY 2012 Army Working Capital Funds. There was 1 proposal with 3 responses. The date of performance completion is July 29/13. The Defense Logistics Agency Land and Maritime in Columbus, OH (SPM7LX-12-D-9007).

July 13/12: RPG nets. Navistar Defense in Lisle, IL receives a $59.4 million firm-fixed-price contract for 1,357 rocket propelled grenade net kits, which means QinetiQ’s Q-Net. Work will be performed in Springfield, OH, with an estimated completion date of Oct 31/12. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received by US Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI (W56HZV-12-C-0201).

March 13/12: A $21.3 million firm-fixed-price contract for “the long wheel rolling chassis upgrade with independent suspension on the MaxxPro [MRAP] and transportation fixtures.” Vid. Jan 9/12 entry for the full explanation; this the installation work associated with its January order to upgrade 2,717 vehicles.

Work will be performed in West Point, MS, with an estimated completion date of May 20/12. One bid was solicited, with one bid received, by US Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI (W56HZV-12-C-0130).

Feb 20/12: Sub-contract. Boler subsidiary Hendrickson in Kendallville, IN and GD subsidiary AxleTech International in Oshkosh, WI get a sub-contract from Navistar Defense, LLC, to equip 2,717 MaxxPro Long Wheel Base (LWB) MRAP vehicles with independent suspension systems, per the $900 million Jan 9/12 contract.

Deliveries began in January 2012, and will be completed in October 2013. GD release.

Jan 24/12: A $109.5 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order for 650 MaxxPro DXM Plus kits. Orders #002-008 add up to 5,217 vehicles. These kits, plus the “rolling chassis” order, add up to 3,367 retrofits.

Work will be performed at the MRAP Sustainment Facility in Kuwait, and is expected to be complete by the end of October 2012. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12 (M67854-07-D-5032, #0020).

Jan 17/12: DOT&E – MRV issues. The Pentagon releases the FY2011 Annual Report from its Office of the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E). The MaxxPro Dash ISS and MaxxPro MRV are both included, but get very different grades. While the MRV towing and recovery vehicle passed blast and live fire testing:

“…the Navistar MRV is not operationally effective and not operationally suitable for recovery operations on cross-country terrain. The Navistar MRV has poor mobility and poor combat towing to recover damaged MRAP vehicles in Afghanistan. The vehicle could not maneuver in soft sandy soil and had difficulty accelerating on hilly terrain. The Navistar MRV demonstrated 271 MMBOMF [Mean Miles Between Operational Mission Failure] versus its operational requirement of 600 MMBOMF. These problems should have been resolved… prior to the [Limited User Test]. The Navistar MRV is [only] capable of recovering and towing damaged MRAP vehicles on flat improved roads.”

The MaxxPro Dash ISS, on the other hand, is declared to be both operationally effective and reliable. Its figure of 1,259 MMBOMF was way above its operational requirement of 600.

Jan 9/12: An $879.9 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order for the procurement of 2,717 MaxxPro “rolling chassis”; 10 engineering change proposals; and 25 contract data requirements lists, for MaxxPro MRAPs.

This is the 3rd step in commonizing the MaxxPro fleet. The first step was the addition of DXM independent suspension in February 2009, which has appeared on all orders after #0014. It was followed in March 2010 by 1,222 DXM retrofit kits. Now, the rolling chassis is the 3rd step, which upgrades most of the earlier MaxxPros with the latest vehicle capabilities. We asked Navistar, who explained that “rolling chassis” replaces the chassis base, adding the DXM independent suspension, a new MaxxForce 9.3 engine, and a 570 amp alternator and driveline. The crew cab is essentially lifted off the old chassis, and bolted on to a new one.

Work will be performed in West Point, MS, and is expected to be complete by the end of October 2013. All funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12 (M67854-07-D-5032, DO #0023).

Jan 9/11: Oshkosh control fight. Icahn’s proxy skirmish at Oshkosh turns into a war, with hard-hitting submissions to shareholders from both Icahn’s group and Board slate, and from Oshkosh’s existing management and Board. If Icahn gets his Board slate elected, spinoffs and a merger of Oshkosh Defense with Navistar become far more likely.

In that scenario, it’s likely that the Maxxpro would take a back seat to the M-ATV in the future firm’s lineup. Oshkosh 8-K | Oshkosh management’s SEC DEFA14A filing (see esp. pp. 38-44) | Icahn Group DFAN14A arguments.

Dec 20/11: A $133.7 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order under a previously awarded contract for 514 field service representatives to support Navistar’s MRAPs. Queries to Navistar confirmed the contract’s size, and their response noted that it included supplies as well as personnel.

Work will be performed in Afghanistan and Kuwait (94%) and the United States (6%), and is expected to be complete by Dec 31/12. FY 2012 operations and maintenance appropriation funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/11 (M67854-07-D-5032, #0022).

Dec 19/11: $9.6 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order for MaxxPro MRV recovery vehicle contractor support, esp. re: the contract data requirements list (CDRLs).

Work will be performed in Warrenville, IL, and is expected to be complete by the end of February 2014, but all funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12. The original contract was competitively procured (M67854-07-D-5032, Delivery Order 0015 under Modification 16).

Dec 6/11: Navistar/Oshkosh merger? Billionaire Carl Icahn owns 10% of Navistar, and 9.51% of Oshkosh, so his comments that the 2 companies should merge draws a lot of attention. He tells CNBC:

“I definitely think it would be a good merger. I think there would be a lot of synergy. I own stock in both and I think shareholders of both companies would benefit.”

Both Boards of Directors are maneuvering defensively around Icahn. Navistar agreed to put its Board up for election each year, but agreed not to propose his own slate of directors at the annual meeting. Things are a bit more open at Oshkosh, where Icahn is proposing Board slates, and has been increasingly critical of existing management.

July 15/11: A $142 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order for 140 MaxxPro Recovery Vehicles (MRVs), plus sustainment, spares and support. That brings total MRV orders to 315. Work will be performed in West Point, MS, and is expected to be complete by the end of November 2011 (M67854-07-D-5032, #0021). See also Navistar release.

July 14/11: Boler subsidiary Hendrickson, and General Dynamics’ AxleTech International, announce 2 contracts from Navistar Defense, LLC to equip 471 MaxxPro blast-resistant vehicles (vid. June 13/11 entry), and 250 MaxxPro Dash ambulances (vid. May 4/11 entry), with independent suspension systems. Their DXM solution uses AxleTech’s 5000 Series Independent Suspension Axle System, and Hendrickson’s engineered sub-frame.

Production work began in June 2011 at Hendrickson in Kendallville, IN, and AxleTech in Oshkosh, WI. Deliveries will be complete in September 2011. GD-ATP.

June 13/11: Navistar Defense:

“Navistar Defense, LLC today announced that it received a $357 million delivery order for an additional 471 International MaxxPro Dash vehicles with DXM independent suspension. The order from the U.S. Marine Corps Systems Command follows last month’s delivery order for 250 MaxxPro Dash Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) ambulances.”

Subsequent events indicate that this is probably delivery order #0019.

May 16/11: An $18.6 million delivery order modification for installation of ambulance engineering change proposals (ECP) and Dash Phase IV ECPs on the recent order of 250 ambulances. Work will be performed in Afghanistan, and is expected to be complete by the end of September 2011 (M67854-07-D-5032, #0018, mod #0001).

May 4/11: A $183.3 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order for 250 MaxxPro Dash Ambulance vehicles, with improved DXM independent suspensions. Work will be performed in West Point, MS, and is expected to be complete by the end of September 2011. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/11 (M67854-07-D-5032, #0018).

This is the 1st order for the ambulance variant, which was unveiled in October 2010 at AUSA (vid. Oct 25/10 entry). These Maxxpros will serve alongside the similar Oshkosh M-ATV ambulances in theater, and will be supplemented by BAE’s heavier 6×6 RG-33 HAGA MRAP. These vehicles are a component in the Pentagon’s broad ‘Golden Hour’ initiative, which aims to begin providing life-saving care within the critical 1st hour of major trauma. See also Navistar Defense release.

April 28/11: Navistar Defense, LLC in Warrenville, IL received a $13.2 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order for field service representatives (FSR) in Kuwait, to sustain operation of the MaxxPro Dash MRAPs in Afghanistan.

Work is expected to be completed by the end of November 2011, but all contracted funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/11 (M67854-07-D-5032, #0017).

March 4/11: Navistar Defense, LLC in Warrenville, IL receives a $32.5 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order to buy MRAP Recovery Vehicle contractor logistics support for spare parts, basic initial issue tool kits and training support. Work will be performed in Louisville, KY (96%), and Warrenville, IL (4%), and is expected to be complete by the end of September 2011 (M67854-07-D-5032, #0015 Mod 005).

Dec 9/10: A $123.4 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order for 175 CAT I MaxxPro Dash vehicles with improved DXM suspensions, plus MaxxPro Dash Engineer Change Proposal (ECP) Phase I & II kits; and support items including associated unique base issue items for the fleet; and independent suspension system deprocessing parts kits. The order raises Navistar’s total orders for the MaxxPro family to 8,014.

Work will be performed in West Point, MS, and is expected to be complete by the end of June 2011. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 31/10 (M67854-07-D-5032, #0016). See also Navistar release.

Nov 19/10: A $252.8 million firm-fixed-price delivery order for 250 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected recovery vehicles (MRV) and contractor logistics support (CLS). Work will be performed in West Point, MS, and is expected to be complete by the end of September 2011. All contract funds will expire at the end of the fiscal year on Sept 30/11 (M67854-07-D-5032, #0015).

A blast-protected recovery vehicle makes a great deal of sense, in an environment where a leading cause of disabled vehicles is IED land mine explosions. Navistar originally unveiled the MRV/ wrecker variant in February 2009, and had competition in this area from BAE’s RG-33 MRRMV. See also Navistar release.

Oct 25/10: Navistar Defense, LLC announces 2 new variants at the Association of the United States Army (AUSA) Annual Meeting and Exposition: the MaxxPro ambulance kit, and the MaxxPro Tractor variant.

The ambulance kit will fit into any MaxxPro variant, and include a litter assist system that helps load stretchers. The MaxxPro tractor, meanwhile, is not a farm implement. It’s the truck half of a blast resistant tractor-trailer rig.

Oct 7/10: The Romanian Ministry of National Defence announces that the first 8 MRAPs have just been supplied to the 811th “Dragonii Transilvani” Maneuver Battalion and the 812th “Soimii Carpatilor” Maneuver Battalion, deployed in Zabul Province, Afghanistan.

These are the first of 60 vehicles provided by the USA, and the lot reportedly consists of 20 new and 40 refurbished MaxxPro Dash vehicles, with improved DXM suspensions. Romanian MND | defpro | Jane’s.

Sept 23/10: A $9.9 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order modification (M67854-07-D-5032, #0011) for field service representatives (FSRs)/instructors/mechanic services outside the continental United States (OCONUS) to sustain operation of the Dash vehicles in Afghanistan, and FSR/instructors inside the continental United States for replacement center training in Fort Benning, GA.

Work is expected to be complete by the end of September 2011, and all contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/10.

Sept 23/10: A $13 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order modification (M67854-07-D-5032, #0014) that pays federal retail excise tax on 148 MaxxPro Dash vehicles being used in the continental United States for training purposes. Work will be performed in Warrenville, IL, and is expected to be complete by the end of September 2011. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/10.

Sept 17/10: A $25.2 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order modification for instructor and field service representative (FSR) support in the United States (CONUS), outside the continental United States (OCONUS); The objective of the FSRs/instructors is to sustain operation of the Dash vehicles in support of Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan. Navistar will also send more FSRs and instructors to Mine Resistant Ambush Protected University and CONUS Replacement Center Training.

Work will be performed in West Point, MS, and is expected to be complete by the end of September 2011 (M67854-07-D-5032, #0011).

Aug 24/10: The US Congressional Research Service releases the latest version [PDF] of its report “Mine-Resistant, Ambush-Protected (MRAP) Vehicles: Background and Issues for Congress. Excerpts:

“As of June 28, 2010, more than 8,500 MRAPs had reportedly been shipped to Afghanistan, with over 3,500 of those being the newer M-ATVs. The Army has recently said that it will begin development of yet another MRAP version – the “Ultra-Lite MRAP” – which raises questions about possible vehicle redundancies. The Marines, although voicing support for the M-ATV program, have retrofitted a number of MRAPs with new suspension systems and reportedly are satisfied with the results. This apparent success calls into question not only if the Marines need all of the M-ATVs allocated to them by DOD but also if the Marines’ retrofitted suspension system might be a more cost-effective alternative for the other services… Among potential issues for congressional consideration are the status of almost 5,000 MRAPS in Afghanistan that are reportedly not being used because of their size and weight.”

In terms of overall budgets:

“Through FY2010, Congress appropriated $34.95 billion for all versions of the MRAP. In March 2010, DOD reprogrammed an additional $3.9 billion from the Overseas Contingency Operations fund to MRAP procurement. Congress approved an additional $1.2 billion for MRAP procurement, included in the FY2010 Supplemental Appropriations Act (P.L. 111-212). The full FY2011 DOD budget request of $3.4 billion for the MRAP Vehicle Fund has been authorized by the House (H.R. 5136).”

June 29/10: A $13.4 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order, modification #03 under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #0014) to buy spare parts related to the order for 1,050 improved suspension MaxxPros. These include suspension system authorized stockage list parts, prescribed load list parts, battle damage assessment repair, and deprocessing; the DASH engineering change proposal (ECP) Phase III upgrade; the remote weapon station system upgrade; and unique collateral material/BII. Work will be performed in West Point, MS, and is expected to be complete by the end of January 2011.

June 14/10: A $60 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order for spare parts to maintain the DXM off-road independent suspension system that is being retrofitted to the entire fleet of 1,222 MaxxPro DASH vehicles. The new DXM systems are provided by Hendrickson Truck Suspension Systems and AxleTech International.

Work will be performed in Warrenville, IL, and is expected to be complete by the end of March 2011. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/10 (M67854-07-D-5032, #0013).

June 14/10: A $17.2 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order for Navistar field service representatives in the Central Command area of responsibility. Work will be performed in Kuwait, Afghanistan and Iraq, and is expected to be complete by the end of June 2011.

May 28/10: Stolen IP? ATS litigation controversy. Armor Technologies, Inc. of South Africa launches the “MRAP Ripoff” web site, and issues a statement, after 3 years of litigation with Navistar. The ancillary web site details the company’s claims, which are summed up via these chosen excerpts from its statement:

“ATS believes it was tricked into transferring unique knowledge, technology and IP about mine-protected vehicles (MPVs) to Chicago-based Navistar Defense, during their relationship from March 2005 to January 2007… At issue is ATS’ belief that it has been hoodwinked into providing critical knowledge and technology on MPVs to Navistar, which before the start of its relationship with ATS in March 2005 had no such expertise… Navistar later claimed in the International Court of Arbitration that Plasan Sasa was the origin of the MaxxPro vehicle, but its own staff admitted to the court that the same team that worked with ATS on the ATS Oryx design, had secretly worked on MaxxPro simultaneously. Navistar can’t have it both ways: either the company illegally shared ATS’ knowledge with Plasan Sasa, which also had no previous MPV expertise, or it acted in exceedingly bad faith in terms of its agreements with ATS – which it then [summarily] broke once it had what it needed: the wherewithal to build a world-class mine-resistant troop carrier… In the meantime, Navistar has won U.S. Government tenders and funding… awarded tens of millions of dollars in U.S. Taxpayers’ money, and it is receiving lucrative foreign orders… none of which would have happened had the U.S. Government heeded its own policy not to do business with defense companies involved in related litigation… ATS’ matter has been taken up by the South African government, which in March [2010] formally requested an explanation from the U.S. Government on the matter.”

May 3/10: A $102.3 million firm-fixed- priced delivery order modification under a previously contract will buy various MaxxPro kits and parts to support operations in Afghanistan. Work will be performed in West Point, MS, and is expected to be complete by the end of October 2010. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/10 (M67854-07-D-5032, #0013). Parts include:

• 937 gunner restraints
  
• 3,251 120V wiring harnesses
  
• 5,722 rear ramp hydraulics, rear ramp hydraulic – non-reoccurring equipment (NRE)
  
• 3,251 rear ramp storage
  
• 2,630 fire support systems kits, fire support systems kits – NRE
  
• 5,716 air conditioning circulation switches
  
• 822 heating, ventilation, and air conditioning kits

March 15/10: A $178.3 million modification to delivery order #0013 under previously awarded firm-fixed priced contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for 1,222 independent suspension system kits and aluminum catcher plates for MaxxPro vehicles. MaxxPros use the DXM independent suspension solution provided by Hendrickson Truck Suspension Systems and AxleTech International.

Work will be performed in West Point, MS, and is expected to be complete by the end of March 2011. Navistar release

Feb 16/10: Looks like the new suspension system worked. Navistar Defense, LLC in Warrenville, IL receives a $751.5 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order #0014. This order will also be used to buy 1,050 MaxxPro Dash vehicles for Afghanistan, with the new DXM independent suspension solution provided by Hendrickson Truck Suspension Systems and AxleTech International.

Other improvements reportedly include door and insulation upgrades, as well as the addition of an inclinometer to act as a level and measures side slope during vehicle operation. The higher center of gravity involved with V-hull vehicles can make them tippy, so that’s definitely something for the driver to watch.

Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS and the contract is expected to be complete by the end of August 2010. The work is expected to add back 400 jobs at the company’s West Point, MS facility, following multiple layoffs in 2009 that had cut staffing to 120. All procurement funds will expire on Sept 30/12. This contract was competitively procured (M67854-07-D-5032 / D.O.0009). Since May 2007, Navistar says it has received orders for a total of 7,494 MaxxPro MRAPs. Navistar release | Daily Times Leader | Aviation Week Ares.

Dec 29/09: A $7 million firm-fixed-priced contract for “CAT III technical labor hour” work to support for the design and development of “the Maxxpro Dash vehicle independent suspension system,” later revelaed to be the Hendrickson/Axletech DXM. Work will be performed in Warrenville, IL, and is expected to be completed by the April 30/10 (M67854-07-D-5032).

The MaxxPro isn’t alone here. Oshkosh’s TAK-4 off-road independent suspension system has recently been used to retrofit MRAP vehicles from BAE Systems and Force Protection, in order to improve their mobility in Afghanistan’s rough terrain.

Nov 9/09: Navistar announces a 4-year System Technical Support (STS) contract worth up to $78 million to provide engineering support for its MaxxPro MRAP. Navistar’s STS award includes work to improve vehicle reliability, support combat issues encountered in theater, add new kits and hardware, as well as provide new vehicle enhancements. The STS award includes up to 143,000 annual labor hours, as well as parts, to be used within 12 months, with the option to renew the contract for 3 additional years.

Sept 09/09: A $48 million firm-fixed-priced modification to a previous delivery order (M67854-07-D-5032, #0004) for procurement of MRAP OCONUS field service representatives (FSRs), OCONUS senior instructors, FSR instructor/mechanics, and various contract data requirements lists.

Work will be performed in the United States and Iraq and will be completed in September 2010. Contract funds in the amount of $48 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The base contract was competitively awarded, and the new requirements are sole source additions to the contract.

Aug 10/09: A $7 million firm-fixed-priced modification under contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #0010) for the procurement of engineering change proposals and tire chains in support of MRAP MaxxPro Dash vehicles. Work will be performed in West Point, MS and is expected to be complete by the end of December 2009. The base contract was competitively awarded, and the new requirements are sole source additions to the contract.

Aug 7/09: A $7.8 million firm-fixed-priced modification to a previous delivery order (M67854-07-D-5032, #0006). It adds vehicle modifications (engineering change proposals), ambulance sustainment parts, and ambulance head clearance retrofit kits for Category I MRAP vehicles.

Work will be performed in West Point, MS and is expected to be complete by the end of December 2009. The base contract was competitively awarded, and the new requirements are sole source additions to the contract.

Aug 6/09: An $8.6 million firm-fixed-priced modification to a previous delivery order (M67854-07-D-5032, #0004) for MRAP OCONUS (Outside the CONtinental US) field service representatives (FSRs), new equipment training instructors, CONUS FSR instructors, and senior FSRs.

Work will be performed in the United States and Iraq, and will end at the end of September 2010. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, at the end of September 2009. The base contract was competitively awarded, and the new requirements are sole source additions to the contract.

July 16/09: A $21 million firm fixed priced delivery order under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #009) for additional initial sustainment items in support of 882 MaxxPro Dash vehicles.

Work will be performed at the Red River Army Depot in Texarkana, TX, and deliveries are expected to be complete by Nov 30/09. Contract funds in the amount of $687,470 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year.

July 10/09: A $71.1 million firm-fixed- priced delivery order modification under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #006) for the procurement of battle damage assessment and repair (BDAR) kits for its MaxxPro Base and MaxxPro Plus vehicle variants.

Work will be performed at the Red River Army Depot in Texarkana, TX and deliveries are expected to be completed by Aug 1/09. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The new requirements are sole source additions to the original contract.

June 30/09: Navistar announces its disappointment at their M-ATV loss, while reiterating their firms’ strong points for investors. The firm did not enter a MaxxPro variant, choosing a derivative of the MXT Husky instead.

June 19/09: A $6.4 million modification to a previous delivery order (M67854-07-D-5032, #004) for the procurement of MRAP field service representative mechanics, back ramp retrofit kits, and several contract data requirement lists outside the USA. Despite the order’s size, the Pentagon release states that: “Contract funds in the amount of $7,291,171 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year.”

Work will be performed in West Point, MS and in Iraq, and work is expected to be complete in August 2010. The base contract was competitively awarded, and the new requirements are sole source additions to the contract.

June 18/09: A maximum $42.9 million firm-fixed-price, sole-source contract for sustainment spare parts in support of Army MRAP vehicles. Contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/09, but the contract will run until Nov 9/09. The Defense Logistics Agency Warren (DSCC-ZG) in Warren, MI manages this contract (SPRDL1-09-C-0088).

June 1/09: A $44.7 million firm-fixed-priced modification to a previously awarded delivery order (M67854-07-D-5032, #0004) for the renewal of Field Service Representative services in the Iraqi and Afghan theaters of war.

Work will be performed in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the final deliveries associated with this delivery order are expected to be completed by Sept 30/10. The Basic contract was competitively awarded and the new requirements were sole source additions to the contract.

April 27/09: A $16.5 million firm-fixed-priced modification to a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #004), for field service representatives for the Mine Resistance Ambush Protected vehicles in theater, Contract Data Requirement Lists (CDRLs), and ECP vehicle modifications.

Work will be performed in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the final deliveries associated with this delivery order are expected to be complete by Aug 16/10.

Feb 25/09: Navistar Defense, LLC unveils 3 new MaxxPro variants at the Association of the United States Army (AUSA) Winter Symposium and Exposition. The MaxxPro Wrecker MRAP vehicle is designed to retrieve damaged or mission-disabled MRAPs, winching them out of trouble and towing them away. Since breakdowns usually involve mined areas, a high level of blast protection is very important.

Navistar also added the MaxxPro Cargo, and the MaxxPro Tractor for towing trailers under full protection. All 3 utility vehicles are built on the company’s International WorkStar platform, with a MaxxPro Dash cab and MaxxForce D 9.3L I6 engine.

Dec 17/08: Navistar Defense LLC in Warrenville, IL received an $8.9 million modification under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #009) Engineering Change Proposal (ECP) upgrades for Enhanced Maneuverability and associated Non-Recurring Engineering (NRE) costs.

In English, it buys initial spare parts support packages for MaxxPro Dash vehicles, which have been modified for use in Afghanistan. Work will be performed in West Point, MS and is expected to be complete by the end of May 2009.

Dec 10/08: Navistar continues to pull away from its MRAP competitors, via a $362.3 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order for 400 more MaxxPro Dash vehicles, which have been modified for service in Afghanistan. Manufacturing under this previously awarded indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #0010) will be performed in WestPoint, MS and work is expected to be complete by the end of May 2009. Navistar will complete delivery of all 400 units while the testing and evaluation of vehicles for the MRAP All-Terrain Vehicle (M-ATV) program is underway.

Navistar’s release adds that delivery of the September 2008 order for 822 MaxxPro Dash vehicles is set to finish at the end of January 2009, a full month ahead of schedule.

Dec 4/08: A $53.6 million firm fixed priced modification to delivery order under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #0004: 754 CAT I MRAPS for $413.9 million) for spares and equipment items needed to support Category I MRAP vehicles in theater. This order will also be used to support the renewal of Field Service Representative contracts within the CENTCOM area of responsibility. Work will be managed in WestPoint, MS, and is expected to be complete in November 2009.

Nov 14/08: The US government issues a pre-solicitation notice for a subsidiary competition called M-ATV, essentially an “MRAP Lite” bridge buy to the JLTV. FBO pre-solicitation #W56HZV-09-R-0115. The MaxxPro Dash is likely to be a prime contender for the buy(s), which begins an expected order of just over 2,000 vehicles but could reach up to 10,000.

A subsequent Defense News article places M-ATV’s top weight at 12.5 tons empty, adding that the RFP still demands significant protection against conventional and EFP land mines. That’s likely to help the heavier MaxxPro Dash, while putting competitors like Force Protection’s 7-8 ton Cheetah at a disadvantage.

The RFP was issued in December 2008. A draft issued on Nov 25/08 stated that M-ATV would receive the same top-priority DX production rating employed by the original MRAP program, adding that the first vehicles are expected to be fielded in the fall of 2009.

UPDATE: By Q2 2009, Navistar had submitted its choice – but it wasn’t their Dash, it was a variant of their MXT light truck.

Nov 7/08: Another $24.8 million for 2 firm-fixed-priced delivery order modifications under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) The modifications would add gunner restraints, and cover funding costs associated with accelerated MRAP Category I production. Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS.

See Sept 4/08 entry for the $752 million order for 822 of Navistar’s lighter MaxxPro Dash vehicles, whose design has been lightened and modified for the Afghan front. On Nov 6/08, Navistar announced that by working around the clock, they were able to meet the military’s request to deliver all vehicles one month ahead of schedule. Originally scheduled to be completed by the end of February 2009, the company has leveraged its extensive relationships with its supply base to provide deliver all units by the end of January 2009. The firm delivered 70 vehicles on Nov 4/08 – 2 weeks in advance of its already aggressive delivery schedule.

That extra commitment isn’t free; the MRAP contract is structured to compensate manufacturers for their extra costs if the government needs vehicles faster.

Oct 29/08: Navistar Defense LLC (ND) in Warrenville, IL received a $56.4 million firm fixed priced delivery order under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #0007) for engineering changes and spares to support MRAP Category I vehicles currently in theater. Delivery order #0007 covered 743 MRAP CAT I vehicles.

Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS, and is expected to be complete by the end of November 2008. This contract was competitively procured.

Oct 29/08: Navistar Defense LLC (ND) in Warrenville, IL received $8.3 million for a firm-fixed-priced delivery order under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #0006) to fund additional Maintenance Workshop Blocks to support MRAP Category I vehicles currently in theater. Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS and is expected to be complete by the end of February 2009. This contract was competitively procured.

See also Dec 18/07, June 19/08, and Oct 7/08 entries re: delivery order #0006, which was for 1,500 vehicles.

Oct 24/08: Defense News reports that more mine-resistant vehicles could be in the order pipeline. The U.S. Army and Marine Corps reportedly plan to rapidly develop and buy a fleet of lighter 7-10 ton vehicles that offer better mine resistance than Hummers, but better off-road mobility than MRAPs. Afghanistan is seen as an especial focus for these vehicles.

Oshkosh’s Sandcat and Force Protection’s Cheetah vehicle are mentioned as potential candidates for that bridge buy. Other competitors are likely, and Navistar’s MaxxPro Dash must also be placed in this category given recent the MRAP orders for deployment of this lightened variant to Afghanistan (vid. Sept 4/08 entry).

Defense News places potential military demand at 2,000- 5,000 bridge buy vehicles – assuming that issues with JLTV issues don’t lead to the bridge becoming the road. Navistar may be covered either way, however; its partnership with BAE won one of the 3 JLTV development contracts.

Oct 7/08: A $35.9 million firm-fixed-priced modification to delivery order #0006 under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for sustainment items needed to support Category I MRAP vehicles in theater. This order will also be used to support several engineering change proposals to increase the vehicles’ capabilities. Work will be performed in West Point, MS and is expected to be complete in April 2009.

See also Dec 18/07 and June 19/08 entries re: delivery order #0006, which was for 1,500 vehicles.

Sept 4/08: A $752 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order for 822 MaxxPro Dash MRAP CAT I vehicles, under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #0009). Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS and is expected to be complete in February 2009.

Pentagon references to “production vehicles with engineering change proposal upgrades for enhanced maneuverability” refer to the MaxxPro Dash, a new variant which is optimized for Afghan operations. The Dash variant is 16” shorter and has an 8″ smaller wheel base, giving it a smaller turning radius of 54 feet. It’s also up to 5,000 pounds lighter, but can accept add-on armoring that will increase its weight. These changes, and the use of Navistar’s MaxxForce D engine, also give it a higher torque to weight ratio for better off-road operations. See also Navistar release.

Navistar already had a strong presence in Afghanistan, as the main truck supplier to the Afghan National Army. Despite earlier Pentagon comments that tagged the BAE OMC/ General Dynamics RG-31 as the favorite for Afghanistan, all vehicles in this MaxxPro order are tagged for Operation Enduring Freedom, and as yet there are no corresponding orders for other MRAPs. DID’s spreadsheet also shows that the 15,771 vehicle program ceiling is now maxed out.

July 4/08: An $84.8 million firm-fixed-priced modification to a delivery order under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #0004) for sustainment items needed to support Category I MRAP vehicles in theater. This order will also be used to support several Engineering Change Proposals to increase the vehicles’ capabilities. Work will be performed in West Point, MS and is expected to be complete in April 2009.

Aug 1/08: A $29.3 million firm-fixed-priced modification to a delivery order under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #0007) for sustainment items needed to support Category I MRAP vehicles in theater. This order will also be used to support several Engineering Change Proposals to increase the vehicles’ capabilities. Work will be performed in West Point, MS and is expected to be complete in April 2009. Deliver order #0007 involved 743 MaxxPros.

Aug 1/08: A $27.4 million firm-fixed-priced modification to a delivery order under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #0002) for sustainment items needed to support Category I MRAP vehicles in theater. This order will also be used to support several Engineering Change Proposals to increase the vehicles’ capabilities. Work will be performed in West Point, MS and is expected to be complete in April 2009.

July 8/08: A $27.7 million firm-fixed price contract for MRAP spare parts. Work will be performed primarily in Springfield, OH and Springfield, MO as well as locations across the USA, and is expected to be complete by Jan 29/10. One bid was solicited on June 26/08 from the manufacturer (W56HZV-08-C-0522). Read Navistar’s “Army Awards Navistar Defense Seven Contracts For Parts And Support:
Contracts Total $125 Million for MRAP Support,” which adds:

“Navistar has shipped more than 185,000 parts pieces to the military for use in Iraq and Afghanistan and has more than 100 field service representatives in theater.”

July 7/08: A $56.9 million firm-fixed price contract for an assortment of automotive parts, including wheels, axles, air conditioners, engines, compressors, generators, and transmissions. Work will be performed primarily in Springfield, OH, with limited production in various cities across the nation, and is expected to be complete by May 4/09. One bid was solicited on April 2/08 (W56HZV-08-C-0494).

July 7/08: A $21.4 million firm-fixed price contract for wheels and pneumatic tires. Work will be performed in Trenton, NJ and is expected to be complete by Jan 30/09. One bid was solicited on June 25/08 (W56HZV-08-C-0520).

June 27/08: A $15.1 million firm fixed price contract for 1,426 air conditioner compressors [NSN 4120-01-555-5459] option priced at $556.11 each; 1,500 condensers for refrigeration [NSN 4130-01-562-3925] option priced at $1,653 each; and air conditioner blowers [NSN 6105-01-562-3922] option priced at $4,378 each. Riding in an enclosed vehicle through 100/40 degree plus heat, while wearing layers of heavy equipment, requires air conditioning as a matter of necessity. At present, 59% of the total condenser and blower options are being exercised, and are considered part of the base award when calculating the contract totals above.

Work will be performed at Dallastown, PA with an expected completion date of Aug 29/08. One bid was solicited with one bid received by the U.S. Army Tank & Automotive Command (TACOM) Life Cycle Management Command in Warren, MI (W56HZV-08-C-0483).

June 27/08: Navistar Defence, LLC in Warrenville, IL received a $6.8 million firm fixed price contract for 2,000 pneumatic tire wheels [NSN 2530-01-555-5456, PN 2596798C91L]; 18 electric engine starters [NSN 2920-01-555-5458, PN 3610516C92[]; and 16 AC generators [NSN 6115-01-555-5460, PN 3819829C91].

Work will be performed in Trenton, NJ, and Belvidere, IL with an expected completion date of Aug 29/08. One bid was solicited with one bid received by the U.S. Army Tank & Automotive Command (TACOM) Life Cycle Management Command (W56HZV-08-C-0500).

June 19/08: International Military and Government LLC in Warrenville, IL is awarded a series of contracts amounting to about $707 million.

The modifications cover both MaxxPro Category I MRAP support and spares, and also “engineering change proposals to increase the vehicles’ capabilities.” Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS under contract M67854-07-D-5032, and are expected to be complete August 2008. The contract modifications include:

• To delivery order #0002 (1,200 for $632.1 M), adds $29.5 million
  
• To delivery order #0004 (754 for $413.9 M), adds $84.8 million
  
• To delivery order #0005 (1,000 for $537.2 M), adds $146.8 million
  
• To delivery order #0006 (1,500 for $1.18 B), adds $211.6 million
  
• To delivery order #0007 (743 for $405.9 M), adds $234.3 million

June 10/08: A $28 million firm-fixed-priced modification to delivery order #0005 under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for the accelerated production of 1,000 MRAP Low Rate Initial Production vehicles.

Delivery order #0005 was for $509.2 million (now $537.2 million), and ordered 1,000 vehicles in October 2007. This is an infusion of funds to speed up production by covering added expenses like overtime et. al., rather than an order for another 1,000 vehicles. Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS and “work is expected to be completed by the end of April 2008.”

May 29/08: The Aug 14/07 entry notes that DynCorp had become Navistar’s in-theater MRAP support network. Now, a DynCorp International release confirms the figures involved:

“Navistar Defense LLC, a division of Navistar International, Inc., awarded DynCorp International (NYSE:DCP) a five year indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity Logistics Support Contract to provide field service support and training for its recently awarded Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicle production contracts. DynCorp International’s Logistics Support Contract has a potential value of up to $500 million over five years with an initial award of $60 million to support deployments to Iraq.”

April 16/08: A $261.3 million for firm-fixed-priced contract modification under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for engineering change proposals to upgrade its MRAP low rate initial production vehicles. The government will procure several engineering changes to provide additional armor protection to increase the survivability of the MRAP Category I (CAT I) vehicles. The order also includes ambulance kits for the vehicles.

Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS and is expected to be complete in November 2008. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was competitively procured. The Marine Corps Systems Command, Quantico, Va., is the contracting activity.

March 14/08: A $405.9 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order (M67854-07-D-5032, #0007) for 743 Category I vehicles. Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS and is expected to be complete November 2008. To date, they have received 5,214 orders under the MRAP program (5,198 CAT-I, 16 CAT-2), 36.9% of the vehicles ordered.

N.B. Amount corrected by DefenseLINK on March 18/08.

Jan 19/08: The NY Times reports that “a gunner was killed and three crew members were wounded” on this day in an IED land mine attack. The soldiers were riding in a MaxxPro MRAP. Read “Hopes for NY Times Reporting Questioned After MRAP Story” for more details.

Jan 10/08: Israeli firm Plasan Sasa announces a $200+ million order to supply Navistar’s International Military and Government, LLC with armoring systems for an additional 1,500 armored MRAP blast-resistant vehicles, to be delivered by the end of July 2008. The Plasan Sasa release says that this armor contract continues and builds on the US military’s June 2007 order for 1,200 MaxxPro vehicles, and notes their investment in US manufacturing facilities.

Dec 18/07: IMG had submitted a variant of its MaxxPro for the MRAP-II competition. It aims to field vehicles that can protect against EFP(Explosively formed Penetrator) land mines, which are more akin to instant tank shells being fired into your vehicle than they are to a conventional explosion. After initial tests, however, only 2 vendors received contracts for additional testing at Aberdeen: BAE Systems (RG-33) and the team of Ideal Innovations, Ceradyne, and Oshkosh (The Bull).

Dec 18/07: A $1.18 billion firm-fixed-priced delivery order under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #0006) to purchase an additional 1,500 MaxxPro CAT-I MRAP Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) vehicles. This order also includes sustainment items needed to support the vehicles in theater, as well as several Engineering Change Proposals to increase the vehicles’ capabilities. Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS and is expected to be complete by the end of July 2008. This contract was competitively procured. Navistar release.

As this accompanying DoD release notes, the Marine Corps issued a number of MRAP orders on this day. Navistar’s IMG remains on top, and even widened its lead slightly. To date, they have received 4,471 orders under the MRAP program (4,455 CAT-I, 16 CAT-2), for 37.6% of 11,862 vehicles ordered.

Dec 7/07: The Rakkasans of the 3rd BCT, 101st Airborne Division in Iraq received 18 MaxxPro CATR-I vehicles. Sgt. Rian Terry, a welder in Co. B, 626th BSB, from Clarksville, TN:

“I like it. It feels safe with all the additional armor. It’s much roomier and easier to access equipment, especially with all your gear on.”

Pfc. Cedric Miller, a grenadier in Co. A, 1-187th Inf., from Blakely, GA, was more direct: “It’s an all-around good truck. We need more.”

American units preparing to receive MRAP vehicles send their maintenance Soldiers attend a 5-day, 40-hour course. During the course, drivers and vehicle commanders participate in both day and night, on- and off-road driving exercises, and obstacle course-like exercises where they maneuver through jersey barriers. Soldiers who complete the 40-hour training are operationally familiar with the equipment. It is up to the unit to make them tactically familiar.

Meanwhile, each battalion is assigned a field support representative and a team of mechanics to continue training the Soldiers. Having civilian representatives and mechanics at the battalion level gives the Soldiers subject-matter experts who are available during maintenance, but will allow the Soldiers to do the hands-on work. US Army

Dec 7/07: A $152 million firm-fixed-priced modification under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for Maxxpro “sustainment items” (spares) under the MRAP program. Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS and is expected to be complete in February 2008.

Nov 28/07: A $24 million firm-fixed-priced modification to delivery order #0004 under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for procure field service representatives to provide support for the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles in theater. Work will be performed in Iraq, and work is expected to be completed November 2008. Note our Aug 14/07 entry – this work will be done by Dyncorp.

Oct 30/07: $68.8 million attached to firm-fixed-priced delivery order #0005 under previously contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for Mine Resistant and Ambush Protected (MRAP) Vehicle sustainment items. The Government shall purchase MRAP University requirements including field service representative-instructors, instructional material, course outlines, and special tooling, and additional sustainment items. Work will be performed at Red River Army Depot in Texarkana, TX, and is expected to be complete by the end of October 2008.

Oct 18/07: $509.2 million for firm-fixed-priced delivery order #0005 under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for 1,000 MaxxPro MRAP CAT I Low Rate Initial Production vehicles. Work will be performed in West Point, MS, and is expected to be complete April 2008. This contract was competitively procured.

Navistar remains in the lead for MRAP orders to date, with 2,971 vehicles (2,955 CAT-I, 16 CAT-II) contracted to date, or 33.8% of the 8,746 MRAP CAT I/II vehicles ordered so far. Force Protection is currently in 2nd place with 30.9%, and BAE/Armor Holdings come in 3rd with 26.3%.

Sept 21/07: International Military and Government LLC in Warrenville, Ill. received $7.2 million firm-fixed-priced modification to delivery order #0002 under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for field service representatives (FSRs) to serve in theater. The FSRs will provide support for MRAP Category I MaxxPro vehicles in Iraq. Work will be performed in Camp Liberty, Iraq, and is expected to be complete in September 2008.

Sept 13/07: International Military and Government LLC in Warrenville, Ill. received a $71.5 million firm-fixed-priced modification to Delivery Order #0002 under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for sustainment items and data requirements for the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles in theater.

The US government is buying 1-Year Forward Deployment Blocks, 1-Year Maintenance Work Blocks, training, training materials, and several contract data requirement lists for International’s MaxxPro MRAP CAT I vehicles. Work will be performed in West Point, Miss., and the deliveries are expected to be complete in October 2007.

Aug 14/07: DynCorp International LLC announces that they have been selected by International Military and Government LLC to provide field-service support and training for its MRAP vehicles. This effectively makes them Navistar’s in-theater support network.

July 20/07: $413.9 million for firm-fixed-priced, delivery order #0004 under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032), covering an additional 755 Category I (CAT I) Mine Resistance Ambush Protected (MRAP) Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) patrol vehicles. Work will be performed in WestPoint, Miss., and is expected to be complete by February 2008. Navistar release.

This contract places Navistar in the lead for MRAP orders to date, with 1,971 vehicles (1,955 CAT-I, 16 CAT-II) contracted to date, or 34.8% of the 5,621 vehicles ordered so far under the 7,774 vehicle MRAP program. Force Protection is currently in 2nd place with 31.7%, and BAE/Armor Holdings come in 3rd with 30.3%

June 18/07: An $8.5 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order #0003 under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for an additional 16 of the larger Category II MRAP JERRV squad vehicles. Note that this works out to about $530,000 per vehicle. Work will be performed in WestPoint, Miss., and work is expected to be complete by February 2008. The DoD release adds, mysteriously, that “Contract funds in the amount of $9,547,248 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year.”

May 31/07: A $623.1 million indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #002) for 1,200 additional Category I (CAT I) Mine Resistance Ambush Protected (MRAP) Low Rate Initial Production vehicles. Work on the MaxxPro MPV contract will be performed in West Point, MS, and is expected to be complete by February 2008. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year.

Which leads us to the next question… will existing MRAP vehicles be enough? They may not, and ironically, International may have declined to submit an offering of its own that could have survived in the new environment.

Footnotes

fn1. A shaped charge ‘squishes’ and detonates when it hits, focusing the blast into a cone with a point that’s like a plasma torch – with a wallop behind it. The immense focused energy converges right on the armor, cutting through the steel and/or blowing chunks off the back in a spray of molten metal of fragments, killing the occupants and/or damaging machinery.

Cage armor can prevent some types of warheads from detonating, especially those with a piezo-electric ‘crush’ fuze. Those of you thinking that metal screens are not 100% certain to prevent warhead detonation, depending on the angle at which the piezo-electric crush fuze hit, and other warhead characteristics, are correct. In general, one can expect cage armor of any sort to turn only about 50-60% of rounds into duds.

The other option “cage armor” provides is to start that process away from the armor, so the shaped charge cone’s focal point is moved out in front of the armor it’s designed to penetrate. Instead of a precisely focused cutting/blasting point, you get an less focused blast. Depending on how big the warhead is, how far away the detonation is, and how strong the vehicle’s armor protection is, its occupants may or may not be saved.

Additional Readings & Sources

• Thanks to Navistar for working with DID to help verify vehicle totals.
• Navistar – MaxxPro Dash DXM.
• DID (Dec 16/13) – High Afghan Exit Costs Force US Military to Contemplate End of Era. Which includes getting rid of many MRAPs.
• DID (Oct 23/13) – Choices, Changes & Opportunities: Corporate Lessons from the Afghan R4D Exit. Understanding the difficulty helps to explain some aspects of subsequent decisions about the MRAP fleet.
• US Army (May 5/11) – ‘Golden hour’ initiative pays off in Afghanistan. Aeromedical units play a big role – but so does having nearby vehicles that can travel in dangerous areas, and carry initial medical facilities with them.
• Plasan Sasa (June 3/07) – Plasan Sasa Will Supply International Military and Government, LLC with Critical MRAP Vehicle Protection for the US Marines [PDF format]
• Navistar (May 31/07) – U.S. Marine Corps Awards $623 Million Contract for Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) Vehicles to International Military and Government, LLC
• Reuters (June 21/07) – U.S. Gen.: Iranian Weapons Still Flowing into Iraq. Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch: “What I try to do is stick to the facts. And I know that inside of my battle space, there are munitions clearly marked with Iranian markings, and I am losing many of my soldiers to EFPs… It is clear that the EFP technology and munitions is coming from Iran. We have to stop that.”
• USA Today (May 31/07) – MRAPs can’t stop newest weapon
• DID (Oct 6/06) – Dispatches from Afghanistan: Armored vs. Blast Resistant
• DID (July 21/06) – GD-RAFAEL’s Reactive Armor Equips US Military (updated)

Appendix A: The MRAP Story, and the MaxxPro Story

In 2005, military manufacturers began to plan for the end of the US military’s Hummer orders, and the associated battle to replace it with a new vehicle. By this time, land mines had already been the #1 killer in Iraq for some time, and a few manufacturers were also looking to break into the American market with solutions to this problem. The technology was not new; indeed, it had been in use for over 40 years. The US military had just been very slow to adopt it, aside from some limited orders the 101st Airborne had placed for South African RG-31 vehicles, limited purchases of Force Protection’s Cougar and Buffalo vehicles for Explosive Ordnance Disposal teams, and M1117 Guardian ASV armored cars for US military police units. Worse, the ASVs were produced in New Orleans. Hurricane Katrina interrupted production just as it was ramping up.

By 2006, 3 years into the war in Iraq, realization began to dawn that the Hummers and their blast-catching flat bottoms needed a supplement in theater now, rather than waiting for the Humvee’s successor. The US Army and Marines began taking a closer look at mine-resistant vehicles on the market, and key manufacturers began maneuvering for position.

The new Mine Resistant, Ambush Protected (MRAP) program would include a smaller Category I MRUV patrol vehicles that seated at least 6 people in total, including the driver and front seat. Category II JERRV vehicles would seat at least 10, and would be large enough to hold bomb-disposal robots and other useful gear.

The expected MRAP requirement quickly began to mushroom in size, as IED land mine attacks intensified on the front lines. A large July 2007 order came hot on the heels of US Secretary of Defense Gates’ request to Congress for an extra $1.2 billion in FY 2007 to fund an additional 2,650 MRAP vehicles, on the grounds that manufacturers were ramping up production more quickly than original forecasts. Meanwhile, key inputs such as steel and tires which might have become production bottlenecks were expedited under a DX rating that give the MRAP program priority over almost all other military programs. Sen. and VP-elect Biden [D-DE], who often heard responses re: lack of industrial capacity when he began asking why more MRAP vehicles weren’t in theater, found that his “put the money together, issue the contracts, and let’s find out” speech [MS Word], embodied in Amendment #739 to the FY 2007 military budget, became the US military’s go-forward plan.

By the time the competition began Force Protection, whose v-hulled Cougar vehicles had catalyzed this realization with their performance in Iraq, was set with their Cougars for MRAP CAT I/II.

General Dynamics was already partnered with BAE OMC of South Africa and the Canadian government to offer the RG-31, which was already in service with airborne and SOCOM customers. Then they signed another deal with Force Protection to share production of Cougar vehicles.

BAE Systems was busy developing their RG-33 family, an update of their proven RG-31s that incorporated new technologies and lessons learned. Meanwhile, Armor Holdings, who supplied the US military’s FMTV medium trucks and up-armoring for its Hummers, worked on an up-armored design based on the FMTV. They would eventually be acquired by BAE in a multi-billion dollar deal, after establishing an MRAP order foothold for their “Caiman” vehicles.

Lacking ready designs or American plants, others chose partnerships as their path to market. Navistar’s truck-building competitor Oshkosh entered the fray with a pair of Partnerships, signing a deal with PVI for their new Alpha MRUV vehicle, and Thales Australia for the larger Bushmaster vehicle that was already serving with Australian forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Protected Vehicles, Inc. (PVI) also submitted the Golan, designed in partnership with RAFAEL and the Israeli military.

German firm KMW’s Dingo had also demonstrated front-line performance with German forces in Afghanistan, but their American partner Textron elected to offer their own M1117 instead, eliminating KMW before the competition had even started.

That left Navistar considering what to do.

Navistar subsidiary International Military and Government LLC (IMG, now Navistar Defense) didn’t have expertise in armored vehicles, but they did know trucks. The firm is used to substantial production numbers, and has a field maintenance network on the front lines. In addition to to being one of North America’s largest producers of civilian commercial trucks and mid-range diesel engines (161,000 vehicles in 2006), it is producing and supporting 2,781 vehicles for the Afghan National Army, and claims 9 additional contracts with the U.S. government for more than 1,000 units each. These contracts encompass include service trucks and buses that have been used in the Iraq reconstruction effort. Production facilities include Garland, TX; Springfield, OH; West Point, MS; Melrose Park, IL (diesel engines); and Tulsa, OK (buses).

The key for Navistar would be finding the right partner, with the aim of developing an armored MRAP-candidate vehicle based around IMG’s WorkStar 7000 truck chassis. In 2005, the firm contracted with South Africa’s Armour Technology Systems (ATS), which has design rights to several mine-resistant vehicles used in South Africa, and had also developed blast-resistant SAMIL armored cab solutions for South Africa’s trucks.

During the course of that relationship with ATS, Navistar also opened relations with the Israeli firm Plasan Sasa, who had been designing and manufacturing up-armoring kits for the Marine Corps’ MTVR trucks for several years. That gave them a solid relationship with the MRAP competition’s key client. The Kibbutz Sasa firm also had experience developing full vehicles; its own light protected vehicle called the Caracal was under review by the US Marines for a different role. Navistar decided that they had found their partner – and in January 2007, they summarily canceled their agreement with South Africa’s ATS.

The question of what ATS knowledge may have been transferred or used by Navistar remains in the hands of lawyers, and also a PR campaign by ATS that publicizes its specific allegations of bad faith and unethical dealings.

The key characteristics of Navistar’s final vehicle contender are clearer. Unlike the HMMWV‘s auto-derived frame, IMG’s heavy-duty truck chassis would have the load capacity required to handle the weight of additional armor etc., without wearing out early. The final design positions a v-shaped crew compartment on top of that truck chassis, allowing maximum production commonality while using the compartment’s armoring and shape to channel blasts around the crew area. Extensive use of components from IMG’s trucks, including predictive maintenance features, would ensure that their entry was both producible in large numbers and maintainable in the field.

In return for this positioning, Navistar’s IMG received a test vehicle production contract for their vehicle – and nothing more. IMG/Plasan Sasa’s MPV was not featured among the early-stage orders [1st set | 2nd set] from the US military for low-risk designs, which went to rivals Force Protection (Cougar), BAE (RG-33, RG-33L), General Dynamics (RG-31), Oshkosh/PVI (Alpha CAT I), and PVI (Golan CAT II).

Yet Navistar went on to become the winner in the initial MRAP competition, with the highest share of any competitor. So why was Navistar initially shut out?

One logical conclusion is doubts about its performance. The biggest downside to capsule-mounting a blast-resistant hull on top of a frame is the danger that a mine blast will separate the capsule from the frame, or (more likely) destroy the chassis and immobilize the vehicle in an ambush zone. Moving a v-shaped blast pan beneath the chassis reduces that danger, but that solution creates issues with ground clearance; and – since it offers less of a gap from the blast – with crew survivability.

What changed? Two things.

One was the Biden Amendment in the Senate, which accelerated funding for MRAPs, even as the desired number of vehicles for the FY 2007-2008 program rose again from 4,100 to 7,774 vehicles. At that volume, existing vehicle manufacturers would be very hard-pressed to deliver the required quantity in time. Which in turn lent a higher value to producibility, as long as the vehicles offered substantially better protection than a Humvee. Especially with the US Army reportedly looking for 17,000 blast-resistant vehicles of its own by 2010 – a number that would be borne out, and more, by subsequent events.

The second thing that happened was the testing at Aberdeen Proving Ground, which appears to have quieted doubts concerning IMG/Plasan Sasa’s design. Navistar received just the 2nd post-testing order to emerge from Marine Corps Systems Command, behind Force Protection’s early 1,000 vehicle order in April 2007. A May 31, 2007 report from Defense News claims that Navistar officials heard about their win from the offices of minority leader Sen. Trent Lott [R-MS] and Rep. Roger Wicker [R-MS], and Navistar spokesman Roy Wiley added at the time that “We did extremely well during the tests [at Aberdeen], and we are extremely pleased.”

Plasan Sasa does make composite armors for vehicles, and whatever it used apparently survived the trials at Aberdeen. Navistar would go on to produce its MaxxPro for MRAP orders, as well as the MaxxPro Air Force, the MaxxPro Plus with improved protection, a MaxxPro ambulance (production orders were for the Dash variant), the MaxxPro MEAP, the MaxxPro Dash for Afghan operations, and the MaxxPro Recovery Vehicle (MRV) for towing other vehicles out of danger zones.

In contrast, Navistar’s trucking competitor Oshkosh failed with both of its purpose-designed vehicles. The firm received 100 advance low-risk orders for the Alpha vehicle, which then failed testing and was removed from the competition. Despite its successful service on the front lines, the v-hulled Australian Bushmaster design never saw a single production order during the MRAP program. It would join Textron’s M1117 on the sidelines, until Oshkosh’s big win in the subsequent MRAP All Terrain Vehicle (M-ATV) competition.

Appendix B: MPV or APC to Face EFPs? (June 2007)

A May 31/07 USA Today article titled “MRAPs can’t stop newest weapon” explains the dilemma:

“The military plans to spend as much as $25 billion for up to 22,000 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles by 2009. Last month, Defense Secretary Robert Gates declared that buying the new vehicles should be the Pentagon’s top procurement priority.

But the armor on those vehicles cannot stop the newest bomb to emerge, known as an explosively formed penetrator (EFP).”

An EFP is just another type of land mine, where the explosives are arranged to shape a metal disk into a kind of instant high-caliber tank round as they detonate, launching it at nearby objects. This is not a new approach; the USA’s Sensor-Fuzed Weapon, a.k.a. “cans of whup-ass,” uses this exact approach but is dropped from an airplane so it can attack through the top, where armor is usually weakest. An EFP’s mode of operation when used as a land mine is a ballistic side attack rather than a conventional land mine’s explosion, which means a v-hull won’t necessarily offer much protection.

These weapons have also been among the land mines causing problems for heavier Stryker/LAV-III wheeled armored personnel carriers in Diyala Province. The Strykers lack the level of underbelly protection found in MRAP vehicles, and their “steel cage” armor designed to defeat [1] the shaped-charge warheads on anti-tank rockets will not stop large-caliber shells – or a reasonable imitation created by an EFP land-mine.

Iran has been heavily involved in shipping these weapons into Iraq for some time now, and training both Shi’ites and Sunnis to make them. A January 13, 2007 document from the USMC says that as the USA fields vehicles with MRAP-class protection against buried mines, Iraqi insurgents’ use of EFPs “can be expected to increase significantly.”

While the US has been testing new armor compositions designed to break up EFP slugs, there is a commonly-available solution on the market. It’s called “reactive armor,” and already equips American Bradley fighting vehicles, M1 tanks, and other armored platforms.

In a sense, it’s the reverse of the EFP concept – instead of using an explosion to create a killing weapon, it reacts with an outward explosion when hit. This either blows the rocket/ tank round/ or EFP projectile completely off-course, or tips it into an easily-absorbed ‘slap hit’ rather than the precise, focused strike required to penetrate steel.

The armor is manufactured in a cooperative venture between Israel’s RAFAEL and General Dynamics, and already has a strong production base. The only counter to it would be a anti-tank missiles that use a dual-warhead charge, like Russia’s AT-13 Metis or AT-14 Kornet. Some of these weapons even have remote-firing capability. That kind of equipment can only come from a state sponsor, however – a fact that sharply ups the ante on its use as a definitive act of war in theaters like Iraq or Afghanistan.

There is already an MRAP contender designed from the outset to use this kind of armor to its maximum effectiveness. Protected Vehicles Inc. MRAP CAT II Golan vehicle was designed in conjunction with RAFAEL and the Israeli MoD’s Merkava tank project office. Unsurprisingly, it was also designed from the outset to carry reactive armor as an option, without changing its outward appearance. The result of this design feature is that the enemy can’t tell if reactive armor is present or not, and must therefore assume “yes” for all vehicles of its type.

The US military ordered 60 Golan vehicles for immediate deployment to the front lines back in March 2007, in addition to its order for test vehicles.

The interesting thing is, IMG had its own vehicle designed from the outset to use reactive armor. The “International APC” was a definite CAT II sized vehicle at 30,000 pounds curb weight. Based on an International MV-7000 heavy truck cab, the APC promised a vehicle equipped with explosive reactive armor from the get-go.

For whatever reason, IMG chose not to enter this vehicle in the MRAP competition. Their APC could never have won a CAT I MRUV order, of course, as the MaxxPro just did. What it might have offered is an additional purchase option for the US military, when EFP land mines begin taking their toll on MRAP vehicles fielded in theater.

Postscript: DID predicted that a number of MRAP vehicle manufacturers were about to start showing much more interest in reactive armor solutions for their vehicles. It’s always more difficult to integrate later, of course, rather than as a design-in option. Still, it was immediately available – and better than nothing. That prediction proved false, as the Army began development of anti-EFP metal armor/add-on kits instead.

In February 2006 the Australian Government gave first pass approval for the replacement of the ADF’s current 105mm and 155mm artillery pieces with new, more capable, artillery systems that feature improved mobility, protection, range and accuracy. Current systems are all towed, and include the aged 105mm M2A2, the L119 Hamel 105mm Field Gun, and the M198 155mm Howitzer. Options for replacing them include a mix of self-propelled artillery systems and lightweight towed artillery systems under an A$ 450-600 million project known as LAND 17. The project will also examine advanced high precision munitions and a networked command and fire control system.

So, how does this project fit into Australia’s larger defense plans? What’s the expected program timeline? And who are the declared and potential contenders? That matters even more now that the solicitation has been released. DID covers the program, and a number of the confirmed or likely competitors… but one category has now been decided.

The LAND 17 Program

LAND 17 fits the combined arms group concept that forms part of the Hardened and Networked Army (HNA) initiative. It also fits with the requirements set out in Australia’s Defence 2000 White Paper, by supporting the ADF’s capacity to sustain a brigade deployed on operations for extended periods whilst maintaining at least a battalion group available for deployment elsewhere.

The Australian Department of Defence planned to release an open Request for Tender (RFT), to identify companies that can provide artillery systems with the level of capability sought. It was expected that the formal LAND 17 RFT would be released in late 2006, with in-service delivery anticipated between 2011-2013. The formal Phase 1 tender wasn’t released until September 2007, however, and the decision wasn’t made until October 2009.

Phase 2 was delayed, and eventually cancelled.

Both artillery types were to be complemented by Australia’s choice of a digital terminal control system. It would allow the tactical control of artillery, naval and close air support fires by forward observers and joint terminal attack controllers. This element of the project was supposed to be considered by Government in the second half of 2010, but the contract took until mid-2012.

Phase 1: The Towed Competition

LAND 17, Phase 1 involved a purchase of 155mm towed artillery pieces. The winner was BAE’s Ultra-Lightweight M777 Howitzer. It uses titanium parts to drive the weapon’s weight down to just 8,250 pounds (4.1 tons), about half the weight of Australia’s existing 155mm M198s. These towed howitzers can easily be airlifted by helicopters like Australia’s CH-47s, and are also qualified to fire the GPS-guided M982 Excalibur shell.

Titanium is a key Australian export, and Canada and the USA have used M777s successfully on the front lines in Afghanistan and Iraq. In July 2010, Australia added itself to the customer list, with a buy of 35. The guns entered service in July 2011, once the first 15 were delivered. Deliveries of the other 20 guns were expected to finish in February 2012, with Final Operating Capability scheduled for 2013.

Cancellation of Phase 1C will lead to another buy of 18 more M777s, bringing the expected total to 53 M777A2 guns. These guns are accompanied by Raytheon’s Advanced Field Artillery Tactical Data System (AFATDS), and the September 2011 release will be used for operator training and live-firing activities. Precision rounds will include Diehl/Rheinmetall’s SMArt 155 anti-tank rounds, and ATK’s screw-on XM1156 Precision Guidance Fuze kit for GPS-guided shells.

The Minister’s 2005 release noted that once in service, the new towed artillery pieces would be used to re-equip units based in Darwin, Townsville, Brisbane and the Combined Arms Training Centre in Puckapunyal, Victoria. This translates into:

• 8/12 Medium Regiment (M198 155mm, Palmerston near Darwin)
  
• 4 Field Regiment (L119 105mm, Townsville)
  
• 1 Field Regiment (L119 105mm, Enoggera Barracks near Brisbane)

Since all of the contenders are 155mm systems, the 8/12’s M198 howitzers will likely be devolved to other units. One scenario was that the 8/12 Medium Regiment’s M198 howitzers would transfer to reserve units. They would supply the single battery of 3 Field Regiment plus the two independent batteries of the former 6/13 Field Regiment, replacing their vintage M2A2 guns that predate the Vietnam War.

Under that scenario, all regular Australian Army units would become standardized on 155mm artillery. This would leave the reserve units of 7 Field Regiment and 23 Field Regiment in New South Wales operating the L119 Hamels, as the only remaining 105mm artillery in the ADF.

Phase 2: The Self-Propelled Competition (canceled)

LAND 17 Phase 2 involved a self-propelled artillery system, and the contenders break into 3 camps just like the global market. Australia’s Phase 2 competition was offered a choice of philosophies, therefore, in addition to a choice of vendors. The program was delayed, then cancelled entirely in May 2012.

In this category, traditional heavily armored tracked vehicles are being challenged by light mobile artillery, mounted on trucks. In between are a mix of wheeled and tracked choices: Soltam’s light tracked Rascal is C-130 portable, but Denel’s wheeled G6 would require a C-17, and so would KMW/GDLS’ wheeled Donar system with its truck-mounted Pzh-2000 turret.

Light mobile

Recent decades have seen the introduction of light truck-mounted 155mm systems such as Nexter’s Caesar and BAE’s Archer. They offer precision fire capability with more road mobility, and better air mobility via carriage in C-130 Hercules or other medium tactical transports.

BAE Bofors FH77-BW-L52 Archer is incorporated into a modified armored 6×6 articulated Volvo A30D truck chassis. It carries a remotely-controlled set of sensors and a machine gun for close-in defense, and the advanced electronics integrated into Archer grant it full compatibility with GPS-guided Excalibur rounds and full autonomy on the battlefield. It’s not air portable in Australia’s C-130Js, however, and will require C-17s for airlift. Thus far, the system has been ordered by Sweden and Norway.

The July 2005 teaming announcement involving BAE and Tenix was rendered moot when BAE bought Tenix, in 2008.

Nexter Ceasar 155mm wheeled self-propelled 155mm howitzer. Developed as a private venture by Giat Industries, the CAESAR system is based around a light 155mm/52 calibre howitzer, mounted on a 6×6 truck chassis fitted with an armored cab. Like the Archer system, it’s highly automated, and Caesar systems can be set into and out of action in less than one minute. Unlike Archer, it hasn’t yet been qualified with GPS-guided precision ammunition like the Raytheon/BAE Bofors GPS-guided M982 Excalibur shell. On the other hand, it can be transported in a C-130J aircraft, and is suitable for rapid deployment. Caesar has been sold to France and Thailand, and Saudi Arabia is interested.

In the French Army, Caesar is integrated with the Thales Land and Joint Systems Atlas artillery C4I (command, control, communications and intelligence) system. ADI (now Thales Australia) is Nexter’s partner, per the September 2004 teaming announcement

Heavy armored

At the other end of the spectrum, traditional heavy armor tracked designs also have a slew of modern options like the British AS90 Braveheart, Germany’s PzH-2000, South Korea’s K9, and the USA’s modernized M109A6 Paladin-PIM. They offer full off-road mobility that can keep up with armored units on any terrain, and provide high levels of protection.

KMW & Rheinmetall’s PzH-2000NL tracked self-propelled 155mm howitzer. These vehicles have been used with great effect by Dutch forces in southern Afghanistan, even fighting alongside Australian forces at times. The Dutch government has reportedly floated offers to sell about 30 of their systems, all of which are quite new; the PzH 2000 is also in service with Germany, Greece, and Italy.

Its chassis is based on the Leopard 2 main battle tank, and includes on-board ballistics computer; sensors that monitor items like muzzle temperature, velocity, etc.; automated ammunition selection and loading; and a GPS-based inertial navigation system designed to determine positional and survey data. At 55 tonnes (about 60.5 tons), the PzH-2000 requires C-17 transport into theater, and heavy truck tank transporters for lengthy overland moves.

South Korea’s K9 Thunder tracked self-propelled 155mm howitzer. Raytheon Australia teamed with South Korea’s Samsung Techwin to offer the K9 and its innovative protected K10 ammunition resupply vehicle (ARV), along with Raytheon’s AFATDS command and control (C2) system. Each K10 ARV supports 2 K9 guns, using a conveyor belt to transfer rounds and bagged charges into the bustle at the rear of the K9 turret at a rate of 48 rounds & charges in 18 minutes. It carries 104 rounds, sufficient to resupply both K9 guns.

The Raytheon Australian release adds that “In addition… we intend to offer… a Package D option for an upgrade for the in-service M198 155mm towed howitzer fleet to deliver reduced weight and a modern weapon management system (WMS)…”

The K9 & K10 are already in production for Korea and Turkey, with over 1,100 ordered thus far. It was also named by Forecast International as “the clear market leader” in its category through to 2015. A typical K9 battalion (or Regiment) would consist of 18 K9s, and 18 K10s for continuous and redundant re-supply. This makes for a total of 90 troops, compared with up to 216 required by Regiment of towed howitzers. The K9’s 56-ton weight would require a berth in one of Australia’s 4 C-17s if it wishes to be airlifted into theater, and heavy truck transports will be needed for lengthy overland moves.

Contracts & Key Events

June 3/12: DTCS Phase 1B buy. The Australian government announces that they’ve finally signed an A$ 63 million contract with Rockwell Collins Australia for 96 digital terminal control systems (DTCS), under Project Land 17 Phase 1B. It provides the ADF with control terminals, tactical full motion video systems, laser target designators and training, and in-service support.

Rockwell Collins provides more precision, characterizing it as an order for 152 systems that will be based on their FireStorm solution. Australia’s DTCS will include a tablet PC, a laser range finder, a laser target designator, a real-time video downlink receiver, a manpack radio, and the firm’s Defense Advanced GPS Receiver (DAGR).

Digital Terminal Control Systems allows Special Forces and artillery forward observers to identify targets with greater accuracy, using precision targeting software. Australian troops will use these systems to call on fire support from land, sea or airborne weapons, including the Army’s new M777 towed artillery. Australia DoD | Rockwell Collins.

June 2011: The June supplement [PDF] to Australia’s Defence Capability Plan highlights a change in LAND 17, Phase 1B:

“Indicative YOD and IOC bands deferred. Cost band reduced (from $100m-$300m to < $100m) with reduction of provision due to early investment in Operationally Urgent Requirement.”

Which is to say, the 2010 purchase of 56 digital terminal control systems (DTCS) for use by special forces and other troops in Afghanistan.

Oct 8/10: Australian Defence magazine reports on the LAND 17 Phase 2 self-propelled howitzer competition, and says it may never get underway:

“Rather than announcing a preferred bidder after what would seem to be a fairly exhaustive and longwinded evaluation phase since tenders closed in April 2008, Defence has arranged a further offer definition and refinement process (ODRP)… Now there are dark rumours that the SPH requirement will not be considered in the latter half of 2010… and that the requirement will be shelved until 2012 when it will again come up for consideration.”

The magazine believes that the government may decide not to move forward with Phase 2 at all, and declare that the M77A2 towed howitzer satisfies all of Australia’s 155mm artillery requirements.

Oct 20/09: Phase 1 win. Defence Minister John Faulkner announces that BAE Systems’ M777 has won the towed portion of Australia’s LAND 17 competition, whose total value is placed at A$ 493 million.

Phase 1 will provide the Army with 35 M777A2 guns, equipping 4 batteries of towed 155mm howitzers. An earlier DSCA request specified up to 57 systems, which allows Australia to order more guns later if it decides that’s necessary.

Phase 2 will pick an accompanying self-propelled artillery system. The competition could become quite interesting, as BAE has past partnerships involving the heavy PzH-2000, as well as its own truck-mounted Archer system. Nexter’s similar Ceasar truck-mounted system is also expected to compete, as is a Raytheon/Samsung K9/K10 entry that would compete with the tracked PzH-2000. The choices offer different philosophies, as well as different systems.

April 14/08: P2 response. Raytheon Australia delivers its LAND 17 Self Propelled Howitzer (SPH) Request for Tender (RFT) response to the Defence Materiel Organisation. Teamed with South Korea’s Samsung Techwin, Raytheon Australia’s solution includes the AS-9 (Samsung Techwin K9) and through life support. Source.

Oct 3/07: SMArt 155 shells. Australia’s DoD buys German SMArt 155 precision-guided anti-tank artillery shells, to replace the laser-guided Copperheads in its stocks. SMArt can be fired from any 155mm howitzer, so its selection will not influence the LAND 17 choice. See: “Get SMArt: Control for Aussie Artillery.”

Oct 1/07: Excalibur shells. Australia requests 250 M982 Excalibur GPS-guided shells, as part of a larger order. Excalibur is not an anti-tank round, unlike the SMArt 155 shells Australia recently purchased. Its accuracy can deliver precise counter-fire at enemy artillery and mortars, however, or target a particular building in an urban environment.

According to Raytheon, 3 levels of Excalibur integration are fielded or in development. All can be integrated on any howitzer and with components from potential host country (communications, command and control, GPS, fire control and other howitzer digitization equipment. Determining Excalibur’s compatibility with each 155 gun requires analysis of gun characteristics and test firings, but a brief look an numerous of the world’s 155 howitzers has not identified any insurmountable road block to Excalibur compatibility. Fire control integration onto platforms is “a fairly simple prospect,” and the accompanying PEFCS module is slightly bigger than a brief case. Determining Excalibur’s compatibility with each 155 gun requires analysis of gun characteristics and test firings, but “a brief look an numerous of the world’s 155 howitzers has not identified any insurmountable road block to Excalibur compatibility.”

Sept 27/07: Australia’s DoD releases LAND 17 solicitation documents. The systems to be acquired include protected self-propelled howitzers; lightweight towed airportable howitzers; and a digitised, networked battle management system. The battle management system includes the Advanced Field Artillery Tactical Data System for the command and control of joint fires, and digital terminal control systems for target acquisition. Australian DoD release.

May 7/07: P2 Teams. Raytheon Australia announces their core team for the Land 17 Artillery Replacement Program. Their “AS-9” proposal teams with South Korea’s Samsung Techwin to offer the K9 tracked self-propelled howitzer, and its fully automated K10 reloader vehicle.

March 20/07: P2 Teams. Krauss-Maffei Wegmann and BAE Systems Australia team for LAND 17. They will offer the PzH-2000 as the self-propelled solution. BAE Systems Australia adds their M777 ultra-lightweight towed howitzers to the partnership, for a combination towed/ self propelled solution.

Feb 22/06: Approval. The LAND 17 program receives first pass funding approval from the Australian government. DoD release.

Additional Readings & Sources

• Australian Defense Materiel Organization – Artillery Replacement 155mm Howitzer – LAND 17 Phase 1A
• Wikipedia – Royal Regiment of Australian Artillery
• Rockwell Collins – FireStorm Integrated Targeting System
• Australia Defence Magazine (September 2008) – Land 17’s shifting landscape. Reports that ST Kinetics’ Pegasus was ruled out on CH-47D transportability grounds, though Singapore uses it with those helicopters, and that the M777 is all alone in the lightweight towed howitzer category.
• Armed Forces Journal (October 2007) – The Case for Cannons. “In May, soldiers from the [US] Army’s 1st Battalion, 82nd Field Artillery Regiment, fired two XM982 Excalibur precision-guided, extended-range 155mm artillery rounds that consecutively penetrated the roof of a single house known to be a terrorist haven in the northern region of Baghdad…”
• Australia Defence Magazine (Dec 2006/ January 2007) – Defence Projects: Is Land 17’s C2 system in the bag? And is the choice of used PzH-2000’s likewise hardwired?
• Australian DSTO TR-1662 (April 2005) – An Application of Queues to Offensive Support Indirect Fire Weapons Systems
• Australian Defence Magazine (Nov-Dec 2004) – Hitting Harder: Future Army Firepower Assets
• Land Warfare Conference (January 2004) – Fitting Offensive Support for Network Centric Warfare? The Impacts of Alternative Organisational Structures

Announced Contenders

• Raytheon Australia (May 7/07) – LAND 17 Program. Their “AS-9” proposal teams with South Korea’s Samsung Techwin to offer the K9 tracked self-propelled howitzer, and its fully automated K10 reloader vehicle.
• Krauss-Maffei Wegman (March 20/07) – Krauss-Maffei Wegmann and BAE Systems Australia team for LAND 17. They will offer the PzH-2000. BAE Systems Australia adds their M777 ultra-lightweight howitzers to the partnership, for a combination towed/ self propelled solution.
• Army Technology – PzH 2000 155mm Self-Propelled Howitzer, Germany
• DID (March 28/05) – $834 Million for Ultra-Lightweight M777A1 Howitzers.
• DID (July 6/05) – Tenix and BAE Team Up for New Artillery Tender. The partner is BAE Systems Hagglunds, via BAE worldwide. The system is the truck-mounted Archer.
• Swedish FMV – Archer Artillery System 08
• BAE Systems – FH77 BW L52 – Archer and the towable FH77 B05 L52.
• GIAT Industries (Sept 28/04) – ADI Limited and Giat Industries team with CAESAR for land 17. Giat is now known as Nexter.
• Army Technology – Caesar 155mm – Self Propelled Artillery System

Potential Contenders

• DID (Oct 31/05) – Singapore Unveils new Air-Portable, Semi-Mobile 155mm Pegasus Howitzers. No word on whether they’ll enter it in LAND 17 – we’ll see once the requirements are out, but it is definitely a potential candidate. Pegasus uses an interesting concept that makes it air-portable using Australia’s CH-47 helicopters.
• The Israeli firm SOLTAM’s truck-mounted ATMOS 2000 System has been touted as a potential candidate in some circles. Its 20-ton tracked Rascal self-propelled system may also qualify, as it’s C-130 transportable. If not, a lighter truck mounted version of Rascal exists: the SPWH 2052.
• South Africa’s excellent G6 system cannot be ruled out, but at this stage, its search for an Australian partner is likely to be difficult. The wheeled self-propelled version would require a C-17 for transport.

Wheeled armored vehicles have become much more common, but the Dutch-German Boxer stands out from the crowd. Its English acronym is “Multi Role Armoured Vehicle” (MRAV), but rather than being a family of different vehicles, the Boxer will use a single chassis, with snap-in modules for different purposes from infantry carrier to command, cargo, ambulance, etc.

The base vehicle has a maximum road speed of 100 km/h (60 mp/h) and an operational range of 1,000 km (600 miles). In its troop carrying configuration, it has a crew of 2 and can carry 10 fully equipped troops. The MRAV is fighting for space in a crowded market, but its principal countries are beginning to give it the front-line credibility it needs to succeed.

Boxer MRAV: The Vehicle

The base 8×8 vehicle provides a load capacity to 8 tonnes (9 tons) and has an internal capacity of more than 14 square meters. The Mission modules fit into the base vehicle’s steel shell, incorporating a primary safety cell with a triple floor and shaped sides to deflect mine blasts. Ceramic modular armor is sandwiched between the vehicle cell and the steel coat, and all three elements are secured by fastening bolts. The shaped sides of the modules also work to deflect mine blasts away from the soldiers inside, while a double-lined hull soaks up critical blast deformation.

The exact maximum weight of a Boxer MRAV depends on the version, and on its add-on armor package. The base is currently about 30 tonnes (33 tons), but its current design allows it to grow to 36 tonnes (39.6 tons) without any additional modification to the drive line. The vehicle and modules are air transportable in an A400M or larger aircraft, and modules are interchangeable in less than one hour.

Boxer MRAV: The Program

In mid-2006 the Netherlands decided to remain in the ARTEC consortium’s joint Boxer MRAV modular armored personnel carrier project with Germany. Despite earlier reservations, Dutch secretary of Defense Cees van der Knaap declared to the 2nd Chamber that the country wanted to continue with the project. By June 28th, 2006, a release noted that the Chamber had given the green light; the APC’s price has apparently been reduced to an acceptable level following negotiations with Stork. A formal contract worth up to EUR 1.2 billion (about $1.6 billion) was finally signed in December 2006, clearing the way for both Dutch & German vehicle production.

The Royal Netherlands Army is purchasing 200 Boxer vehicles for transport, engineering, command, and transportation of wounded, replacing some of their YP-408s and all of their M577s (command post version of the M113). The 200 Boxer MRAVs will be delivered in 5 versions – 58 ambulances, 55 Command Post variants, 41 engineer group (pioneer) vehicles, 27 cargo vehicles, and 19 cargo/command-and-control vehicles to replace the current YPR 765 tracked vehicles. Note that this figure is down from initial estimates of 384 vehicles.

In addition to the Boxers, the Dutch Army will also be operating BAE Hagglunds’ CV90-35 MkIIIs as Infantry Fighting Vehicles.

Under current plans, Jane’s revised reports indicate that the German Army is due to take delivery of 272 Boxer vehicles in 3 baseline versions: 135 armored personnel carriers (APCs), 65 command post (CP) variants, and 72 heavy armored ambulances. The Boxers will replace some Fuchs 6 x 6 and tracked M113-series APCs currently in service; like the Dutch Boxers, they will fill a middle weight armor role alongside heavier tracked Infantry Fighting Vehicles – in this case, the new KMW/Rheinmetall Puma.

The Boxer program is being managed by the European OCCAR (Organisation for Joint Armament Cooperation) Armaments Agency. Britain was initially part of the MRAV consortium as well, but left in 2003 to pursue its own future armored vehicles project called FRES. The industrial contractor is ARTEC GmbH – acting on behalf of the consortium formed by Kraus-Maffei Wegmann (36%), Rheinmetall Landsysteme (14%) and Stork PWV (50%).

Manufacturing of the vehicles will take place in both countries. Amsterdam-based Stork PWV is the national prime contractor and system integrator for the Dutch Boxer vehicles. As a partner, Stork Special Products is also responsible for assembling of the power pack consisting of a MTU engine, angular gear, transmission, cooling block and over 1,200 minor parts in total. They’re also developing the Environmental Control System, an air-conditioning system with integrated NBC(nuclear, biological, chemical) protection.

Contracts and Key Events

August 29/18: Spike LR2 to equip ADF Boxer The Australian Ministry of Defense is confirming that it will arm its Boxer combat reconnaissance vehicles with the Spike LR2. The country is procuring a total of 211 Rheinmetall Boxers under its Land 400 Phase 2 program. The Spike LR2 is produced by Israeli defense contractor Rafael and is the latest member of the multi-purpose missile family. The missile has the capability to destroy a number of different targets including MBTs with reactive armor and fortified structures. The LR2 is equipped with a passive and uncooled multi-band seeker that integrates both thermal and HD imagery and includes a smart target tracker with AI features, allowing the missile to track and target automatically.

August 21/18: Boxer CRVs for the ADF Jane’s reports that Australia is ordering several hundred Boxer CRVs from Rheinmetall Defense Australia (RDA). The acquisition of 200 Boxer CRVs is part of Australia’s Project Land 400 Phase 2. The Australian Defence Force (ADF) will introduce several variants of the Boxer with the reconnaissance variant, accounting for 133 of the 211 vehicles. The Boxer’s design is based on a modular structure selected to give the maximum flexibility for multipurpose operations. The vehicle incorporates a high level of standardisation and uses commercially proven automotive components. The 8×8 vehicle provides a load capacity of up to 8t and has an internal capacity of more than 14m³. The contract has a value of $4.1 billion. The vehicles are scheduled for delivery between 2019 and 2026.

April 04/18: UK back in the Boxer’s ring The United Kingdom will again join the Dutch-German Boxer program, 14 years after deciding to opt out. The Boxer, a “Multi Role Armored Vehicle” (MRAV), uses a single chassis, with snap-in modules for different purposes from infantry carrier to command, cargo, ambulance and others. The base vehicle has a maximum road speed of 60 mph and an operational range of 600 miles. In its troop-carrying configuration, it has a crew of 2 and can carry 10 fully equipped troops. The UK left the program in 2003 over concerns that the vehicle would be too heavy for transport by RAF’s C-130s. For well over a year, British Army officials have been pushing for a deal with Artec, the Boxer producing Krauss-Maffei-Wegmann and Rheinmetall joint venture. The Boxer is supposed to fulfill the Army’s mechanized infantry vehicle requirement by 2023. Recently Australia tapped the German manufacturer for the provision of 200 vehicles with a total cost of $2.48 billion. Artec will cooperate with local partners including, BAE Systems, Pearson Engineering, Raytheon UK and Thales UK. Assembly, design, and manufacture in the UK would generate approximately 1,000 jobs and keep about 60 percent of the $2.7 billion contract within the UK.

February 9/18: An offer the UK can’t refuse? German-Dutch consortium ARTEC has promised to produce and assemble the majority of its Boxer armored personnel carrier (APC) at Pearson Engineering’s factory in northeast England, if the UK Ministry of Defense finalizes orders for the supply of several hundred of the eight-wheel drive APCs to the British Army. Assembly, design, and manufacture in the UK would generate approximately 1,000 jobs and keep about 60 percent of the $2.7 billion contract within the UK—an attractive offer in a nation looking to keep and boost manufacturing employment after the decision to leave the European Union in 2016. The announcement was made by ARCTEC—a joint venture between Krauss-Maffei Wegmann and Rheinmetall?as part of a statement that it had recruited as part of its team, Pearson, BAE Systems and Thales UK, and comes as the MoD closes on a decision whether to buy the Boxer without a competition. However, as the Daily Telegraph reports, concerns about a funding hole in the defence budget means a decision contract has been pushed back, as well as being complicated by rival suppliers complaining they have been shut out of the program and that Artec’s proposals would not offer as much work to the UK supply chain as theirs.

July 7/17: Rheinmetall MAN Vehicles expects to receive a contract from ARTEC—the consortium behind the Boxer 8×8 vehicle—to modernize 38 of the armored vehicles for the German Army. ARTEC, a joint venture of Krauss-Maffei Wegmann GmbH, Rheinmetall MAN Military Vehicles GmbH and Rheinmetall MAN Military Vehicles Nederland, received the order from OCCAR, the European procurement agency in late June, in a deal that is in excess of $23.8 million. The deal will see the vehicles upgraded from the command variant to the A2 level, which requires changes to the vehicles’ chassis and mission modules. Other enhancements include advanced driver visualization technology, new weapon systems, IT equipment modules and new communication systems.

August 24/16: Lithuania’s Ministry of Defense continues with the modernization of their land forces after awarding a $435.1 million contract to the German-Dutch Artec consortium for the provision of 8×8 Boxer infantry fighting vehicles (IFVs). The group, a cooperation between Krauss-Maffei Wegmann and Rheinmetall MAN Military Vehicles will deliver the vehicles equipped with Israeli-made turrets and armed with 30 mm cannons and Spike LR anti-tank missiles. This follows a bilateral cooperation between Lithuania and the Dutch government, who are currently in the process of transferring second hand Army land vehicles east to boost Lithuanian military capabilities.

June 25/14: Dutch delivery. Formal delivery of the 1st Dutch Boxer to the 13th NL Brigade’s medical company. The Director of the NL Defence Materiel Organisation symbolically delivers the vehicle by handing over a wrench that serves as an emergency opener for the rear door. Sources: OCCAR, “Formal handover of first Netherlands BOXER vehicle to the customer”.

April 7/14: Update. OCCAR-EA’s BOXER Programme Manager has approved delivery of the first Dutch Boxer, an ambulance variant. The NL AMB BOXER vehicle is the first BOXER vehicle built at the new Rheinmetall MAN Military Vehicles – NL facilities in Ede, The Netherlands. The schedule foresees that the last of the 52 NL AMB will be delivered in January 2015, to be followed with the next NL BOXER vehicle types: Command Post (CP), Engineers Group (GNGP) and Cargo (CAR). The Dutch are getting 8 Driver Training Vehicles (DTV), and 192 Boxer variants for delivery by the end of 2017.

Germany has already received 225 vehicles, built by KMW in Munich and by Rheinmetall in Kassel, leaving just 47 left to be delivered to Germany before the end of 2016. Sources: OCCAR, “Start of The Netherlands’ Ambulance BOXER delivery”.

May 2012: LANCE. Rheinmetall announces that a concept study equipping the Boxer with Rheinmetall’s LANCE medium caliber turret has finished trials at their test center in Unterluss. The firm worked with RMMV Kassel, RLS Augsburg and RLS Kiel, to combine the LANCE turret system with a Boxer module, and modify the mission module.

Jan 24/12: The German Bundeswehr produces a video about the Boxer’s combat deployment in Afghanistan. Deployment is going well, but they may want more storage space. That’s always an interesting challenge with APCs. The Boxer CP variant is set to arrive in theater in February 2012. German Bundeswehr [in German] | Aviation Week.

July 22/11: German Boxer A1 MRAVs ship out to Afghanistan, aboard chartered AN-124 aircraft.

A1 is a modification set designed for ISAF operations in Afghanistan. It includes extra armor, raising the FLW-200 remote weapon station 30 cm/ 1 foot to give it better coverage high and low, and an appropriate camouflage pattern for the ISAF region. FuInfoSys networking between the Boxer and the infantry group equipped with the IdZ-21 Future Soldier system is standard. KMW.

March 3/11: Germany readies to deploy the Boxer. Its driver training school in Dornstadt received 7 Driver Training Vehicles (DTV) in 2010. In February 2011, another 8 Boxer APCs were delivered to 292 Jaegerbattalion in Donaueschingen, in preparation for the vehicle’s deployment to Afghanistan with this unit in August 2011. OCCAR | German Army [in German].

Oct 7/10: BAE Systems announces a $3.6 million contract from Krauss-Maffei Wegmann (KMW) to manufacture and deliver SCHROTH brand 4-point harness safety restraint with integrated airbag systems, to equip for 125 German Boxer vehicles. BAE will produce 7 restraint systems per vehicle (875 total), along with replacement parts. As part of the agreement, SCHROTH engineers have also developed a special, self-administered diagnostic tool for soldiers to verify that the systems are in working order. Deliveries of the new restraint system are expected to be completed in 2014.

Airbags to protect passengers are nothing new in civilian vehicles, but they’re still rare in combat vehicles. In the event of a crash, sensors on the SCHROTH harness measure the resulting acceleration, and send signals to gas generators whose micro pyrotechnical charges deploy the airbags in a fraction of a second.

April 27/10: A brief to the Dutch Parliament says that Boxer MRAV “Drive Module” (main body) qualification will not be done by the end of 2010, as scheduled. The vehicle did not fully meet contracted standards, and Germany’s intent to use Boxers in Afghanistan in 2010 has had effects of its own.

An agreement was reached with Germany for post-delivery qualifications in 2010, during so-called “Reliability Batch Trials,” with any changes Germany requires made at the manufacturer’s expense. Agreements were also made concerning post-qualification of some Drive Module sub-components, and alteration of the Logistic Qualification Course.

In contrast, the Dutch absolutely require pre-qualification before they’ll accept delivery. That means delays for series production of Dutch vehicles, and to the future Cargo, Ambulance and Command versions. Extra budget is also being requested to modify the Dutch C2-LAN system to a full C4I system. Kamenbrief [in Dutch]

Feb 8/10: KMW subsidiary Dutch Defense Vehicle Systems (DDVS) opens a new production facility in Helmond, near Eindhoven, NL. The facility will produce all hulls and several mission modules for the German-Dutch Boxer vehicle program, which currently stands at a total of 472 vehicles. Helmond will also be the site for logistics and maintenance service to the Dutch fleet of Fennek reconnaissance vehicles. KMW release [PDF]

Sept 23/09: At a ceremony in Munich, Rheinmetall Defence and Krauss-Maffei Wegmann (KMW) transfer the first serially produced Boxer to the Organisation Conjointe de Coopération en matière d’Armement (OCCAR), which is administering the Boxer project, and Germany’s Federal Agency for Defence Technology and Procurement (BWB). Rheinmetall | KMW [PDF format].

May 8/08: ARTEC’s Boxer MRAV made a dramatic comeback to reach the finals, but lost to General Dynamics MOWAG’s Piranha-V in Britain’s FRES-Utility competition. | UK MoD release | General Dynamics UK release.

June 14/07: Stung by criticism that the MoD has wasted years in order to select off-the-shelf vehicles that may not be survivable enough, Minister for Defence Equipment and Support Lord Drayson fires back in a public forum:

“Yes, the Boxer was a programme the MoD pulled out of when it was known as the MRAV programme. We took that decision in 2002 in light of the requirement at the time. We have since reviewed the FRES requirement in light of recent operational experience in Iraq and Afghanistan. Force protection in theatre now has a higher priority than strategic deployability – I don’t think anyone would argue with that view. When the situation changes our procurement process must be capable of responding to that change… I’m not going to go into the details of the protection FRES will have in a public forum… But to suggest that we are ignoring the threats we face in Iraq and Afghanistan today when we set the requirement for our future vehicles is wrong. And the idea that taking into account the full range of threats FRES will be less well protected than the patrol vehicles you list (such as the Mastiff) is also wrong. Finally, let’s all be clear that FRES is neither a protected patrol vehicle nor a replacement for Warrior…”

Given Canada’s poor experiences with wheeled vehicles in Afghanistan, and the Stryker’s emerging difficulties against new IED land mines in Iraq, this may become a recurring subject.

June 8/07: Britain’s MoD announces the FRES finalists. Surprisingly, the SEP vehicles don’t make that list, nor do other test platforms. All of the finalists are wheeled: General Dynamics MOWAG’s Piranha IV, Nexter (formerly Giat’s) VBCI – and the KMW-ARTEC Boxer, which Britain pulled out of several years ago in order to pursue FRES.

The vehicles will go on to the “trials of truth,” and the MoD says the outcome of the trials will be announced by the end of November 2007. At that point, “one or more utility vehicle designs will go forward for detailed assessment.” UK MoD release | Nexter release | KMW release.

May 23/07: Jane’s Defence Weekly reports that ARTEC expects to deliver the first Boxer 8 x 8 MRAV to the German Army on schedule in late 2009, with deliveries to the Royal Netherlands Army following in 2011.

Dec 19/06: At Bernardkazerne in Amersfoort, the Netherlands, a contract is signed for series deliveries of the Boxer Multi-Role Armoured Vehicle to the Netherlands and German armed forces. The series production contract covers up to 272 vehicles for Germany and the 200 vehicles for the Netherlands, with a total value of EUR 1.2 billion (about $1.58 billion), of which Stork will receive EUR 500 million (about $660 million) from 2008 – 2016. Up to 70% of Stork’s turnover will be subcontracted. Deliveries of the vehicles will start in 2009 and extend for seven years.

The contract for Stork encompasses a continued design for 2 new Boxer versions, the series production of 200 Boxer vehicles in 5 versions and an initial in-service support package. The Netherlands army will use the Boxer in 5 different versions: an ambulance vehicle, command post, engineer vehicle, and two types of cargo vehicles. See Stork release.

Dec 13/06: The Budget Committee of the German Bundestag approves MRAV acquisition. Formal signing of an OCCAR acquisition contract by representatives of Germany and the Netherlands is expected to take place on December 19, 2006. The order will reportedly encompass 400 vehicles, 200 of which are earmarked for the German Bundeswehr. Under this contract, the Germans would also have an option for a further 72 units configured as field ambulances. See Rheinmetall release, also KMW release in German.

Oct 13/06: The Dutch Ministerie Van Defensie issues a release noting that the Council of Ministers has approved the purchase of 200 Boxer APCs for the Dutch Army; the final decision now moves on to Parliament (and see Oct 10/06 entry below). The first Boxer MRAVs will enter service in 2011, and deliveries will be complete in 2016. Defense Aerospace’s translation adds some additional information that doesn’t appear to be in the Dutch release, noting that:

“On the basis of information supplied by industry, the operating cost of the Boxer for 200 vehicles over a life span of 30 years was initially estimated at approx. 1,125 million euros (excl VAT). More recent estimates have allowed the Ministry of Defence to reduce the projected life-time operating cost to 938 million euros (excl VAT), based on the best available data.”

In approximate US dollars, the range would be $1.176 billion – $1.41 billion, or about $5.88 – $7.05 million per vehicle over a 30-year operating period.

Oct 10/06: Jane’s International Defence Review reports that The Netherlands national elections scheduled for November 22, 2006 could lead to changes on the defense front. “With the electorate more or less split down the middle, a change of government from the current centre-right coalition to a new centre-left or even 100 per cent-left coalition is not impossible.” Such shifts would have implications for programs like the Boxer MRAV. As it happens, the Dutch elections produced losses for all major parties and left Parliament in a similar balance.

Additional Readings & Sources

• ARTEC Boxer official site
• Stork NV – Boxer. The subsidiary tasked with production is Stork PWV, who has this Boxer page, and also the Stork Special Products page that includes details re: some of Stork’s sub-projects within the program.
• KMW – Boxer Wheeled Vehicle
• Rheinmetall Defence – Boxer
• Army Technology – Boxer MRAV Wheeled Multi-Role Armoured Vehicle, Europe
• Ministerie van Defensie (June 28/06) – Kamer Steunt Voortgang Boxer
• Janes (May 22/06) – Revised bid aims to put Boxer back in the ring
• Ministerie van Defensie (June 21/06) – Nederland Gaat Door Met Boxer Pantservoertuig
• Janes (Oct 3/05) – Boxer misses key pricing deadline

The RQ-11 Raven is a 4.2-pound, backpackable, hand-launched UAV that provides day and night, real-time video imagery for “over the hill” and “around the corner” reconnaissance, surveillance and target acquisition.

Each Raven system typically consists of 3 aircraft, 2 ground control stations, system spares, and related services. The digital upgrades are still designated RQ-11Bs, but they enable a given area to include more Ravens, with improved capabilities. The secret? Using L-band spectrum more efficiently.

• Ravin’ bout Ravens: Current Models, and Proposed Upgrades
  
• Contracts and Key Events [updated]
  
• Additional Readings
  

Ravin’ bout Ravens

The Raven has received positive reviews from Army units in the field. The basic RQ-11 “Raven B” has a wingspan of 4.5 feet, weighs 4.2 pounds when taken out of its backpack and assembled. The hand-launched UAV includes a color electro-optical camera, or an infrared camera for night operations. The UAV operates just 100-500 feet off the ground, which removes many airspace “deconfliction” and clearance issues. Traveling at 30-60 mph on its quiet electric motor and lithium-ion batteries, it can fly for about 60-90 minutes. Line-of-sight control range is about 6.2 miles.

The man-portable Raven system features 3 UAVs, a ground control unit, a remote video terminal, transit cases and support equipment.

With respect to the digital upgrade, Commenting about the digital upgrades in National Defense magazine, Col. Gregory Gonzalez, project manager of the Army’s unmanned aerial system (UAS) program, said:

“This allows us to have more capable and faster processing for better payloads. By using the frequency spectrum in [the L-band] more efficiently, we will be able to [fly] up to 16 Ravens in a specific geographical area, as opposed to just four.”

The digital upgrade also includes greater communication security through signal encryption. The analog Ravens have come under scrutiny because they send unencrypted video signals that could be intercepted by insurgents equipped with a laptop computer, reports the Associated Press.

The Raven system can be flown manually or autonomously through set way-points with options of either a daylight or infrared camera. Over 3,000 Ravens have already been deployed to US forces for use in light infantry Military Operations in Urban Terrain (MOUT) and dismounted warfare.

Full funding for the digital upgrade order was provided by a US Department of Defense supplemental funding bill. Deliveries of the Raven digital systems and kits began in October 2009.

Beyond the “digital Raven” project, Col. Gonzalez’s office is proposing adding 2 new sizes of UAV: 1 that would be smaller than the current 4.5 feet long, 4.2 pound RQ-11B, and 1 that would be larger. All 3 sizes would use the same controller and frequency, and would link into the Army’s “One System” remote video terminal. The proposal still needs to be approved by the Army leadership.

Contracts and Key Events

Unless otherwise indicated, AeroVironment in Simi Valley, CA is the contractor.

FY 2018

September 17/18: Portuguese purchase Jane’s reports that the Portuguese Army is ordering 12 RQ-11B Raven DDL UAS to strengthen its ISTAR Battalion’s surveillance systems company. The contract has a value of $6.9 million and also includes the acquisition of equipment and services. The RQ-11 Raven is a 4.2-pound, backpackable, hand-launched UAV that provides day and night, real-time video imagery for “over the hill” and “around the corner” reconnaissance, surveillance and target acquisition. The man-portable Raven system features 3 UAVs, a ground control unit, a remote video terminal, transit cases and support equipment. Deliveries are scheduled to take place from March 2019 to January 2021.

FY 2016

December 23/16: RQ-11B mini-UAVs used by the Ukrainian military have proved ineffective against Russian-backed insurgents fighting in the eastern Donbass region. Separatists have proved adept at jamming and hacking the drones’ video and data feed, due to the datalink being analog. This has left command channels and data unprotected from interception and suppression by modern means of electronic warfare. As a result, the UAVs have been left far from the front lines, in case they give away Ukrainian positions.

November 2/16: The Netherlands has contracted AeroVironment to conduct upgrade work on their RQ-11B Raven UAVs in a $10.3 million deal. In service since 2008, the Ravens will see their current analogue configuration upgraded to include AeroVironment’s digital datalink. Also included in the deal are new Puma AE and Wasp micro unmanned air systems, plus a new ground control station and support, which AeroVironment says will be delivered within six months.

August 1/16: As part of the European Reassurance Initiative package, Ukraine has received 24 RQ-11B Raven UAV systems from the US. The hand-launched reconnaissance and surveillance tool are being given to help increase and modernize Ukrainian security efforts amid ongoing violence in the country’s eastern regions. More than $600 million has been made available by the US for training and equipment to help Kiev better defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity.

Oct 5/11: A $6.9 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for new USAF Raven systems, and Initial Spares Packages. USAF Security Forces plan to employ Raven systems to enhance situational awareness and security at bases worldwide. This initial order will provide training systems for USAF personnel, as a precursor to broader deployment.

Work will be performed in Simi Valley, CA, with an estimated completion date of Feb 29/12. One bid was solicited, with one bid received by U.S. Army Contracting Command in Redstone Arsenal, AL (W58RGZ-11-C-0055). See also Aerovironment.

Sept 8/11: Aerovironment announces a $15.9 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract order to support US Army Raven systems over “the next several months.”

May 25/11: AeroVironment, Inc. in Monrovia, CA receives an $8.4 million firm-fixed-price contract for 67 Army Digital Data Link Raven Systems and 67 Army Raven Digital Data Link spares packages.

Work will be performed in Simi Valley, CA, with an estimated completion date of May 14/12. One bid was solicited, with one bid received, by the U.S. Army Contracting Command at Redstone Arsenal, AL (W58RGZ-11-C-0055). The U.S. Army continues toward its total acquisition objective of 2,358 systems (7,074 UAVs), though that may rise. See also Aerovironment release.

April 20/11: The US Army currently equips each brigade with 15 RQ-11B Raven systems, but the 9 Afghan BCTs want to raise that to 35 each (105 UAVs). They’re also shipping larger Puma-AE UAV systems into theater, with 64 in and another 20 requested. So what’s the problem? Training.

Right now, the US FAA requires Federal Aviation Administration must issue a certificate of authorization, in order to fly UAVs in US air space. There are limits to that requirement, but it takes months to get that certification, and it’s hurting operator training. Commanders are complaining that some operators lack adequate pre-combat preparation, and must learn on the job.

In response, the US Army has instituted a buddy program, a tracking program for operators, and a ground-based technical solution. Under the buddy program, skilled mini-UAV operators will teach other soldiers. The web tracker will make sure that qualified operators don’t get lost in the shuffle when they move from one brigade to another. The technical solution involves a ground-based sense-and-avoid system that may help expedite FAA certification. NDIA’s National Defense Magazine.

April 12/11: A $14.8 million order for 248 US Army digital Raven UAV retrofit kits. Work is scheduled to be completed by December 2011, and will be performed at Simi Valley, CA, with an estimated completion date of Oct 9/12. One bid was solicited with one received. by the US Army Contracting Command at Redstone Arsenal, AL (W58RGZ-05-0338). See also Aervironment release.

Feb 4/11: Aviation Week reports that the US Army wants to beef up UAV availability down to the platoon level, in an environment where, as Army Operations Office aviation UAS director Lt. Col. James Cutting puts it, “there will never be enough multi-million-dollar systems to cover them.” Where now there are 17 RQ-11 Ravens in a brigade combat team (BCT), the Army plans to increase this to 49 “Small UAS family of systems”, initially made up of AeroVironment’s Puma AE at the high end, RQ-11B Raven as the core, and smaller Wasp III as the true “flying binoculars” micro UAV.

Down the road, this set is expected to be a competition, and the numbers involved make it an attractive target. According to Cutting, the Army will push the new UAVs directly down to engineer, armor and infantry units , rather than forming more aviation units and adding their overhead. Since the UAVs in question are so small, and fly at under 1,000 feet, they can be used without worrying about “deconfliction,” and don’t really require the same planning & support overhead as, for instance, a unit of RQ-7B Shadows, or MQ-1C Gray Eagles. Aviation Week | Aviation Week Ares.

Jan 27/11: A $7.8 million firm-fixed-price contract for 919 U.S. Marine Corps Raven Module 2 upgrade sets. The upgrade kits allow digital RQ-11B Ravens to operate using a different frequency band than the stock configuration. Funding was appropriated in the 2010 Department of Defense Appropriations Act.

Work will be performed in Simi Valley, CA, with an estimated completion date of April 30/11. Even though they’re for the Marines, 1 bid was solicited with 1 bid received by the U.S. Army AMCOM Contracting Center at Redstone Arsenal, AL (W58RGZ-05-C-0338). See also Aerovironment.

Dec 28/10: A $46.2 million order for 123 new digital Raven UAV systems and spares, as well as 186 digital retrofit kits for the USMC and 339 digital retrofit kits for the US Army. The order represents the remainder of funds appropriated for the Raven systems procured in the FY 2010 DoD appropriations. Work is expected to be completed within a year. AeroVironment release

May 10/10: An $11.2 million firm-fixed-price contract, exercising and finalizing a not-to-exceed FY 2010 option for up to 113 full rate production Raven systems, 113 Raven initial spare packages, and Raven engineering services. This effort procures 63 Raven systems; 63 Raven initial spare packages plus Raven engineering services, and logistics support for the family of systems proof of principle effort. The latter appears to be Col. Gonzalez’ “3 sizes” approach.

Work will be performed in Simi Valley, CA, with an estimated completion date of Jan 30/11. U.S. Army Contracting Command, CCAM-AR-A at Redstone Arsenal, AL is the contractor (W58RGZ-05-C-0338). See also Aerovironment release.

April 12/10: A $12.3 million order for 216 retrofit kits to upgrade existing analog Ravens to digital data link capabilities. Aerovironment release.

April 6/10: A $6.8 million firm-fixed-price contract exercises a priced option for 51 US Marine Corps RQ-11B systems with digital data links plus 51 initial spares packages and contractor logistics support.

Work is to be performed in Simi Valley, CA, with an estimated completion date of March 29/11. One bid was solicited with one bid received by U.S. Army Contracting Command/CCAM-AR-A at Redstone Arsenal, AlL (W58RGZ-05-C-0338).

Feb 23/10: AeroVironment in Monrovia, CA announces that it received firm fixed-price orders valued at $20.7 million for digital Raven UAVs and digital retrofit kits, and $17.1 million for Raven system spare parts, repairs and training services for the US Army and US Marine Corps. The Raven system and retrofit order represents a portion of the $121 million appropriated for RQ-11 Raven system procurement in the FY 2010 Department of Defense Appropriations Act. The items and services provided under these awards are scheduled to be delivered over the next 12 months.

Dec 21/09: AeroVironment in Monrovia, CA announces that it recieved a $23.9 million firm-fixed-price contract modification to supply digital RQ-11 Raven hand-held UAVs and digital kits to upgrade existing analog RQ-11s being used by the US Army and US Marine Corps. If all options are exercised, the potential value of the contract modification is $66.6 million.

Additional Readings

• Aerovironment – UAS: Raven
• USAF Fact Sheet – RQ-11B Raven
• Army Technology – RQ-11 Raven Unmanned Aircraft System, USA
• Designation Systems – AeroVironment RQ-11 Raven
• DID – Handling UAV-Generated Huge Data Volumes
• U.S. Department of Defense (Nov 9/10) – Armed with Science. Describes how Spartans (U.S Army 2nd Heavy Brigade Combat Team) employed the Raven system to reduce enemy attacks on U.S. forces.
• National Defense Magazine (November 2009) – Army to Expand Raven Family of Unmanned Aircraft
• DID (Feb 24/05) – Raven UAV Draws Raves from the Field

Firefinder radars track the path of incoming shells, rockets, mortars, etc., and calculate the point they were fired from. Raytheon’s TPQ-36 radar is specifically designed to counter medium range enemy weapon systems out to a range of 24 kilometers, while the TPQ-37 can locate longer-range systems, and even surface launched missiles, out to 50 kilometers. Michael Yon, embedded with 1-24 (“Deuce Four”) in Mosul, offered a first hand description of counter-battery radars’ effect on enemy tactics in 2005.

Better radar technologies offer a number of potential advantages for this role, including wider fields of view and less maintenance. Not to mention fewer disruptive, time-sucking false positives for deployed troops. In September 2006, Lockheed Martin began a contract to deliver their “Enhanced AN/TPQ-36” (EQ-36) radars. Despite the close official name and designation, this was a wholly new radar system, from a different company. Orders have begun to accumulate, along with deployments – and, finally, a less confusing designation change to AN/TPQ-53.

The TPQ-53 Counterfire Radar System

The TPQ-53 includes a number of operational improvements, including 360 degree coverage capability instead of the TPQ-36’s current 90 degrees, and dramatic reductions in false alarm rates. A successful program would replace many of the TPQ-36 radars currently in service.

In 2002, the US Army began a research project called the Multi-Mission Radar Advance Technology Objective. The goal was similar to the US Marine Corps’ G/ATOR: a single mobile radar system able to perform Air Defense Surveillance, Air Defense Fire Control, Counter Target Acquisition (artillery tracing) and Air Traffic Service missions. Unlike the Marines, the Army didn’t proceed from there toward a full development project. Instead, they incorporated some of the technologies and learning from MMRATO into a competition that would begin by fielding radars to solve the CTA problem.

Both the truck-mounted AN/TPQ-53, and the smaller Humvee-mounted TPQ-50 LCMR (Lightweight Counter Mortar Radar) trace back to that effort, and the TPQ-53 also grew out of lessons learned from the previous generation TPQ-36/37 Firefinder radar series. The base radar technology is more advanced, and software and hardware were modernized. Mechanically, the radar got more robust gears, a rotating platform, an automated leveling system for faster and more reliable emplacement, and an improved air cooled system to improve reliability and keep costs down. The Army expects these changes to save millions of dollars over the radars’ lifetimes.

An AN/TPQ-53 radar system is actually made up of 2 vehicles. One FMTV truck is the Mission Essential Group, containing the radar antenna and the power generator. The second FMTV truck carries the Sustainment Group, with a climate controlled operations shelter and backup power generator.

The TPQ-53 is IFPC (Indirect Fire Protection Capability) compatible in countering rocket, artillery, and mortar attacks, and the Army is thinking of adding software upgrades to allow it to track larger targets, and perform air defense surveillance against UAVs, helicopters, and enemy aircraft.

The system’s operations center allows the radar to link back to Army command systems like AFATDS and FAADC2. Linkages to ground-based Counter Rocket Artillery and Mortar (C-RAM) command systems, which can also connect to fire control radars and defensive weapons like the Phalanx Centurion, provide a complete defensive solution for protected bases. If the radar’s functions expand to include broader air defense, those command system linkages will become even more important.

Automation and built-in test sensors means that only 4 soldiers can operate the system, with an emplacement time of 5 minutes and a displacement time of just 2 minutes. This compares to 3 HMMWVs and 6 people for the previous TPQ-36v8 system; or 2 FMTV trucks, 2 HMMWVs, and 13 people for the TPQ-37v8.

A built-in encrypted wireless radio can reach up to 1 km away, allowing operators to disperse and make themselves more difficult targets. Soldiers can use a pair of ruggedized Linux laptop computers to handle operations from anywhere in range, or work from the climate-controlled shelter vehicle.

EQ-36/ TPQ-53: Program and Industrial Team

The initial Quick Reaction Capability (QRC) contract for 5 radars was issued in January 2007. In spring 2007, the prototype completed successful counterfire target acquisition testing in both 90- and 360-degree modes at the U.S. Army’s Yuma Proving Grounds in Yuma, AZ. In summer 2007, the system completed successful air surveillance testing at White Sands Missile Range in White Sands, NM. A prototype was unveiled in October 2007, and the 1st system was delivered to the Army in summer 2009. By late 2010, the first EQ-36 systems were deployed in Iraq & Afghanistan.

An August 2011 option raised the EQ-36’s QRC order total to 36 systems (4 + 12 + 17 + 3), though some official documents place the number at 38. Another 65 AN/TPY-53 radars were ordered later, following the Milestone C update decision that launched low-rate initial production.

Over the longer term, the potential exists for $1.6+ billion in orders, covering all QRC units + 136 radars in the program of record. The Full Rate Production decision is scheduled for Q4 FY 2014.

Industrial team members for the EQ-36 program include Lockheed Martin Maritime Systems and Sensors (MS2):

• Lockheed Martin MS2 in Syracuse, NY (Program lead, antenna array, digital module assemblies);
  
• Lockheed Martin MS2 in Moorestown, NJ, facility (transmit/receive modules);
  
• Lockheed Martin Simulation, Training and Support, in Orlando, FL (TPQ-53 training system and curriculum);
  
• Burtek, Inc. in Chesterfield, MI (operations shelter and stationary platform);
  
• Syracuse Research Corp. in Syracuse, NY (digital signal processor);
  
• Tobyhanna Army Depot in Tobyhanna, PA (maintenance support).

Contracts and Key Events

The radar is an American product, with the USA as its founding and largest customer. As such, timelines and divisions use American fiscal years, which end on September 30th.

October 10/18: Configuration Lockheed Martin is being tapped to introduce a full rate production configuration to the new AN/TPQ-53 (Q-53) radar. The US Army is awarding Lockheed with a contract modification that sees for the insertion of Gallium Nitride into the Q-53. The Q-53 is a mobile, maneuverable, fully supportable and easily maintained counterfire target acquisition radar. Compared to currently deployed systems, the new, battle-tested Q-53 offers enhanced performance, including greater mobility, increased reliability and supportability, a lower life-cycle cost, reduced crew size, and the ability to track targets in a full-spectrum environment, a vital capability on today’s battlefield. According to the press release, the transition to GaN will provide the Q-53 with additional power for capabilities including long-range counterfire target acquisition. GaN has the added benefit of increasing system reliability and reducing lifecycle ownership costs. Work will be performed at Lockheed’s factories in New York, New Jersey and Florida.

FY 2014 – 2017

June 7/17: The US State Department has cleared the sale of Lockheed Martin’s AN/TPQ-53 counter-battery radar to Saudi Arabia. Valued at at estimated cost of $662 million, the deal marks the first export order of the radar outside of the US. Included in the deal are 26 AN/TPQ-53(V) Radar Systems to include Solid State Phased Array Radar with KN-4083 Selective Availability Anti-Spoofing Module (SAASM) enhanced Land/Sea Inertial Navigation System (INS) and automatic leveling system, as well as various equipment, training and materials. Riyadh reportedly intends to use these radars to support its border security requirements and modernise its armed forces with a more current capability to locate and counter the source of incoming ballistic artillery, rockets, and mortars.

April 25/17: Lockheed Martin has won a $1.6 billion contract to continue manufacturing the AN/TP-Q-53 counterfire radar for the US Army. The Q-53 Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar will eventually replace older systems like the Q-36 and Q-37, and is capable of detecting incoming indirect fire like rockets and mortars, allowing response time for troops to reach cover, but they can also detect the location of the launch site. This allows counter battery fire to triangulate and respond with fire of their own. Lockheed Martin remains the only supplier of such systems to the Army.

April 2/17: The US Army has awarded Lockheed Martin a $1.5 billion contract to produce and deploy the AN/TPQ-53 Counterfire Target Acquisition Radar System. Developed as a replacement for existing AN/TPQ-36 and AN/TPQ-37 Firefinder radar systems, the new radar is designed to detect, classify, track and determine the location of enemy artillery assets such as mortars, cannons and rockets. The service claims that once in place, the radars will provide increased mobility, reliability and performance.

June 29/16: Lockheed Martin’s AN/TPQ-53 counter-battery radar has proven that it can be used to detect unmanned aerial vehicles alongside its usual task of detecting incoming artillery and rocket fire. The company announced the success following testing carried out by the US Army as part of its Maneuver and Fires Integration Experiment (MFIX) at Fort Sill, Oklahoma. Conducted annually, the MFIX exercise brings together military, industry and academia to assess solutions to future warfighting needs in a live environment.

February 9/16: Testing of the Q-53 Counterfire Target Acquisition Radar System in June 2015 has shown the radar is having difficulty detecting volley-fired mortars. While the second initial operational test and evaluation (IOT&E) found the system effective against single-fired rockets, artillery, and mortar munitions, it was unable to handle the detection of more than one munition fired at the same time, according to Michael Gilmore’s annual Operational Test & Evaluation report. The radar also struggled to identify the difference between a mortar, a rocket, and artillery. The Army, however, has stated that the radars have been working well in operational environments, and plans are to increase performance in high clutter environments with development and integration of software upgrades in 2019, with more testing planned for 240 mm and 122 mm munitions not assessed in previous tests.

April 7/14: Support. Lockheed Martin in Liverpool, NY receives a $9.1 million contract modification for interim contractor ssupport of the AN/TPQ-53 radar fleet.

All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2012 Army budgets. Work will continue until Sept 30/14, and will be performed in Liverpool, NY. US Army Contracting Command in Aberdeen, MD manages the comntract (W15P7T-06-C-T004 P00092).

March 28/14: +14. Lockheed Martin in Liverpool, NY receives a $145.9 million contract modification for another 13 AN/TPQ-53 radar systems, along with 13 corresponding sets of on-board spares. This is the 4th installment under the March 13/12 multi-year contract, and brings orders to $751 million: 65 systems over 4 phases.

All funds are committed immediately, using FY14 US Army budgets. Work will be performed in Liverpool, NY, with an estimated completion date of Nov 30/16. US Army Contracting Command in Aberdeen, MD manages the contract (W15P7T-12-C-C015, PO 0022).

June 27/13: +19. Lockheed Martin Corp. in Liverpool, NY receives a $206.9 million firm-fixed-price contract modification to procure AN/TPQ-53 Radar Systems and corresponding spare parts, using a combination of FY 2012 and 2012 funds. Lockheed Martin sets the number at 19 radar systems, and this order brings the cumulative total face value of this contract is $605.1 million over the low-rate initial production contract, with 52 systems ordered over 3 phases.

Work will be performed in Syracuse, NY. US Army Contracting Command at Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD manages this contract (W15P7T-12-C-C015, PO 0010). Sources: Pentagon, Lockheed Martin Aug 26/13 release.

March 12/13: Support. Lockheed Martin Corp. in Liverpool, NY receives a $12 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification, to provide interim contractor support for the AN/TPQ-53 radar system.

Work will be performed in Liverpool, NY until the end of FY 2013 on Sept 30/13. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received (W15P7T-06-C-T004).

Dec 19/12 – Jan 17/13: future competition for FRP? PM Radars issues a Sources Sought request to determine whether reintroducing competition for Full Rate Production (FRP) may be possible in FY 2014. In other words, this is not an RFP to displace incumbent Lockheed Martin just yet, but it’s the homework that might create the option to do so.

The Army anticipates an FRP contract in Q4 FY 2014, as a single award, firm fixed price (FFP) contract comprised of a base year, with multiple separately priced options and range quantities. Spares, new equipment training, and technical manuals will also be acquired on a FFP basis. This would lead to the acquisition of about 70 systems over 4 years. Key factors in the source selection process include a Live Ammunition System Demonstration (LASD) planned for the first half of FY 2014. Data witnessed by the Army Test and Evaluation Command (ATEC) will not be an adequate substitute to participating in the live demo.

The submission date for this information request, originally set to Jan 14, 2013, is later postponed to Feb. 12. The FRP RFP itself is planned for release in Q4 FY 2013, with an award in Q3 FY 2014. FBO: W15P7T-13-R-C113.

Jan 2013: DOTE report. In its FY2012 report, the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation notes reliability improvements, with less frequent system aborts than the 2011 system demonstration’s 1 per 30 hours. Some of these original issues were attributed to user documentation and training, which slated for further improvement.

Even so, the results show a fallback from vast improvements after initial configuration changes, to a final configuration figure of 1 abort every 75 hours during limited testing. Initial Operational Test & Evaluation is scheduled for fall 2013, and the radars will need a big jump to hit required reliability levels of 1 abort every 257 hours.

A Limited User Test (LUT) took place in the fall of 2012, but that’s in FY 2013, and so it isn’t covered in the 2012 annual report.

Oct 17/12: Add other functions? The US Army announces that it has begun fielding the AN/TPQ-53, and the Humvee-mounted AN/TPQ-50 Lightweight Counter Mortar Radar, to protect forward-deployed forces. They also discuss a number of the AN/TPQ-53 system’s features, and reveal that the Army is considering software upgrades that would add general air surveillance radar capabilities against helicopters, UAVs, cruise missiles, and aircraft. Note that the radar’s antenna is heavily derived from the 2002 MMR ATO radar project, which already contemplated air volume search as a mission.

One indication that the Army is serious is that they’re moving the program from PEO IEWS Product Manager Radars, to PEO Missiles and Space. That will organize air defense radars under the same organizational umbrella as the counter-fire radars. US Army.

April 20/12: +21. Lockheed Martin issues a release citing $391 million in US Army contracts for 33 TPQ-53 systems.

Asked for clarification, the firm explains that the US Army has exercised its 2nd option under the contract since the March 13/12 announcement, adding another $225 million for another 21 systems (W15P7T-12-C-C015).

April 2/12: Lockheed Martin MS2 Radar Systems in Liverpool, NY receives a $23.3 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract, for services “in support of the EQ-36 radar” through April 30/13.

Work will be performed in Liverpool, NY. The original bid was solicited through the Internet, with 3 bids received by U.S. Army Contracting Command in Fort Monmouth, NJ (W15P7T-06-C-T004).

Jan 17/12: Test reports. The Pentagon releases the FY 2011 Annual Report from its Office of the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E). The “Enhanced AN/TPQ-36 (EQ-36) Radar System” is included. The Army conducted 3 Live Ammunition System Demonstration (LASD) radar test events at Yuma Proving Ground, Arizona, in October 2010, January 2011, and June 2011. Unfortunately, the DOT&E office reports that the systems had problems with reliability and accuracy:

“Based on radar testing at Yuma Proving Ground and Army reporting from theater to date, radar reliability remains poor and is well below system requirements… one system abort every 30 hours [instead of 1 per] 185 hours… provided accurate locations of most rocket, artillery, and mortars systems… [but] has difficulty detecting certain types of rockets and artillery rounds. Using updated software, the QRC AN/TPQ-53 radar demonstrated improvements in reducing the rate of misclassifying aircraft as threat projectiles in the 90-degree and 360-degree modes… June 2011 testing, the QRC AN/TPQ-53 radar decreased the rate of [false positives, but]… misclassifying and false location reporting rates remain below the Program of Record requirement of one false report in 12 hours.”

Aug 15/11: Army Contracting Command (ACC) APG-C4ISR, in Aberdeen, MD announces that it intends to buy more EQ-36 radar systems, to begin Program of Record purchases instead of the Quick Reaction Capability buys to date.

The solicitation for Full Rate Production (FRP) was first posted on Feb 16/11 at an estimated value of $940 million. The response date has been postponed by 30 days to Sept 14/11, under “Best Value” consideration and Firm Fixed Price (FFP) pricing. A June 30/11 revision addressed inconsistencies on desired quantities that had built up since the presolicitation. The planned production schedule for this 5-year contract is currently set to 12 Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) units in FY 2013, 23 LRIP units in FY 2015, and 32 Full-Rate Production (FRP) units in FY 2016, for a total of 67 systems (W15P7T-11-R-T201). FBO.gov, ASFI.

June 21/10: Sub-contractors. Donaldson Company announces that the EQ-36 will use its patented StrataTube filtration technology to air-cool its electronics, without introducing dust and other contaminants. Current schedules have the final units for that initial 17-system June 2007 contract delivered by fall 2010.

Donaldson StrataTubes use inertial force to spin dust and other contaminants out of the air stream, but have no moving parts to wear out or break, and are maintenance-free. Custom designed EQ-36 Strata panels are included in the radar’s antenna and pedestal systems, and it joins other StrataTube using military devices like the M1 Abrams tank and H-60 family of helicopters.

April 29/09: Lockheed Martin Maritime Systems & Sensors in Liverpool, NY receives a $20.7 million firm-fixed-price contract that buys spares for the 12 initial production Enhanced AN/TPQ-36 Radar Systems.

Work is to be performed in Liverpool, NY, with an estimated completion date of Aug 31/10. One sole source was bid solicited from the radar’s manufacturer and one bid was received by the CECOM Acquisition Center in Fort Monmouth, NJ (W15P7T-06-C-T004).

July 29/08: +12. Lockheed Martin Maritime Systems and Support in Syracuse, NY receives an $84.3 million firm-fixed-price contract to accelerate the production and delivery of the 12 Enhanced AN/TPQ-36 Firefinder Initial Production Radar Systems (EQ-36), which were listed as options within the initial development contract. Those options were reportedly exercised in June 2008.

Work will be performed in Syracuse, NY, and is expected to be complete by Oct 25/10. There was one bid solicited on March 23/08, and 1 bid was received by the CECOM Acquisition Center in Fort Monmouth, NJ activity (W15-P7T-06-C-T004)

Nov-Dec 2007: Testing. A prototype EQ-36 radar built by industry partner SRC is tested against mortars and rockets at Yuma Proving Ground, AZ. During the tests, the EQ-36 prototype successfully located the firing positions of both rocket and mortar launchers. Lockheed Martin says that live fire testing was conducted over a 7 day period without a single false alarm.

2002: MMR ATO. Contract to Syracuse Research Corp. (SRC) for a “Multi-Mission Radar, Advanced Technology Objective”. The radar is designed to perform C-RAM/ Firefinder, Air volume search, Short Range Air Defense (SHORAD), and Air Traffic Control functions.

For this demonstration project, Lockheed Martin is a sub-contractor. The radar turns out to be a TPQ-53 precursor. Later, the roles flip to make SRC a Lockheed sub-contractor, with responsibility for the radar’s core Digital Signal Processor.

Additional Readings

• Lockheed Martin – TPQ-53 Radar System. Formerly called the EQ-36, or Enhanced AN/TPQ-36 Counterfire Target Acquisition Radar. Still referred to that way in some contracts.

Competitors and predecessors include…

• Raytheon – AN/TPQ-36 Firefinder Weapon Locating System. See also ThalesRaytheon page.
• Global Security – AN/TPQ-36 Firefinder Radar
• Raytheon – AN/TPQ-37 Firefinder Weapon Locating System. See also ThalesRaytheon pages for the TPQ-37.
• Global Security – AN/TPQ-37 Firefinder Artillery Locating Radar
• DID – US Marines to Get G/ATOR AESA Ground Radars. G/ATOR’s scope matches MMRATO’s, but its evolution is a reverse image of the TPQ-53’s. It begins with air defense, and will add counterfire in Increment II. By Increment IV, it will have all of MMRATO’s envisioned capabilities, including Air Traffic Control.
• DoD Inspector General, via WayBack (Oct. 2001) – Firefinder audit report [PDF]. Older Firefinder radars were known as AN/TPQ-36, AN/TPQ-37 and AN/TPQ-47.r Artillery Locating Radar
• DID – US Marines to Get G/ATOR AESA Ground Radars. G/ATOR’s scope matches MMRATO’s, but its evolution is a reverse image of the TPQ-53’s. It begins with air defense, and will add counterfire in Increment II. By Increment IV, it will have all of MMRATO’s envisioned capabilities, including Air Traffic Control.
• DoD Inspector General, via WayBack (Oct. 2001) – Firefinder audit report [PDF]. Older Firefinder radars were known as AN/TPQ-36, AN/TPQ-37 and AN/TPQ-47.

Germany has always been known for producing excellent armored vehicles. A combination of features that arguably make it the world’s best tank, and fire sale prices stemming from Germany’s rapid disarmament, have made the Leopard 2 the standard main battle tank in Europe and beyond. The same level of innovation and execution was shown in the late 1960s, when Germany’s Marder became the west’s first Infantry Fighting Vehicle (IFV). Designs like the American M2/M3 Bradley, Sweden’s CV90 family and new SEP, Singapore’s Bionix-II, and Korea’s new XK-21 have stepped far beyond that legacy, however, and even the Russian region has continued to update their BMP designs. Meanwhile, the nature of military operations has changed to emphasize modularity, out of country missions, advanced electronic communications, and strong protection against threats like land mines.

The Marders need to be replaced, and this became a priority even within Germany’s limited defense budget. In response, German armored vehicle leaders Rheinmetall & KMW formed a 50/50 joint venture to design and produce a solution that would address these issues, and return Germany to a leadership position in the tracked IFV field. Enter the new Puma IFV – which has just received a EUR 3 billion production order from Germany.

Puma IFV: Platform & Features

The Puma carries a crew of 3, plus 6 fully-equipped troops and its weapons array. PSM’s design goals for the Puma were simple to state, but difficult to execute:

Optimum protection against any type of threat for maximum survivability of the crew. The Puma features two different levels of protection. The basic ‘Class A’ configuration is qualified in accordance with STANAG 4569. It provides protection against RPG-7 rockets and armor-piercing rounds under 25mm in the frontal arc, and artillery shell fragments and 7.62mm weapons all around. PSM won’t discuss mine-protection techniques, but say that the Puma has full mine protection in its Class A configuration per STANAG 4569 against heavy anti tank mines. As a comparison, PSM states that the Puma’s inherent mine protection is much higher than that of KMW’s Dingo 2 mine-resistant vehicles.

The exhaust is cooled before release to minimize infrared signature, and the company claims that the rear ramp can double as a 2-man fighting station when partly closed. Unlike Israel’s Merkava tanks, however, there is no sniper port in the rear door. The usual array of automatic fire extinguishers, NBC (nuclear, biological, chemical) overpressure protection, etc. defends against unconventional threats.

These IFVs can be quickly reconfigured for higher intensity combat by adding separately transported modular armor made of “steel and non-steel elements,” which raises the protection level up to ‘Class C’. The vehicle retains the same anti-mine protection as Class A, but now has strong protection on the sides that will defeat RPG-7 rockets, medium-caliber weapons fire up to 25mm, and Explosively Formed Projectile (EFP) mines. Explosive reactive armor can be added on request, and so can active protection systems (APS) that fire rockets or shockwaves to defeat incoming missiles or tank shells. The EADS/KMW/Buck MUSS APS is already integrated, and others can be added or substituted on request.

Special roof armor elements in Class C can provide protection the crew from air or artillery delivered bomblets, though they will not protect against an explosively formed projectile fired through the top, like Germany’s popular GIWS SMArt shells.

Optimum armament for escalation and de-escalation in all missions. The Puma has a remote-controlled turret that carries a 30mm MK30-2 ABM stabilized cannon with a 3 km/ 1.8 mil range for fire on the move, elevation from -10 to +45 degrees, and a coaxial 5.56mm MG4 machine gun. The fire control system reaches beyond armored vehicles, and can handle slow-moving aerial targets like helicopters and UAVs.

The remote control turret allows a unified crew compartment, without a turret basket that holds the commander and gunner. The vehicle carries 200 main rounds ready and another 200 in storage, and the dual-feed system allows the gunner to switch seamlessly between APFSDS-T armor piercing rounds and KETF submunition/fragmentation rounds with programmable fuzes. Grenade dispensers are mounted behind the turret for smoke etc.

At present, other commercial remotely-operated small-medium caliber weapon systems have not been integrated with the Puma’s remote-controlled main turret. That’s scheduled to be part of a 2nd stage vehicle upgrade program a few years after acceptance in 2014, along with anti-tank missiles that would bring Puma to parity with American Bradley IFVs, Russia’s BMP… and even the Marder IFVs Puma will replace.

Rapid, strategic, global deployability and high tactical mobility. A highly compact 890 series 10-cylinder, 800kW (1,080 hp) diesel engine from Tognum AG subsidiary MTU Friedrichshafen includes a new starter generator developed jointly with the company ESW, and a new transmission from Renk. If the Puma met its weight targets, that engine would offer a specific power-to-weight ratio of 20-25 kW/t, and can drive the Puma at up to 70 km/h/ 42 mph. Reports indicate that the final vehicle is overweight, which would push those performance figures down.

The Puma has 450 mm/ 18 inches of ground clearance despite its mine protection, and aims at an unrefueled range of 600 km/ 360 miles when equipped with full Class C protection. Decoupled running gear with hydro-pneumatic elements offers maneuverability and a smoother ride.

Deployability offers different challenges. The USA has spent billions in a fruitless quest to create survivable vehicles under 20 tons that can fit into a C-130, but Germany set a more realistic goal. The Puma’s Gross Vehicle Weight (max. recommended weight) is 43t/ 47.4 tons.

In its basic Class A configuration, Germany wanted a 31.45t/ 34.667-ton vehicle that can be airlifted in the Airbus A400M; indeed, the ability to carry the Puma is a firm requirement for Germany’s continued participation in the A400M program. If the A400M can meet this specification, the vehicle’s protection will be adequate for any landing strip secure enough to land the aircraft.

Add-on armor modules that improve the Puma’s protection to Class C raise its weight to a target of 41t/ 45.2 tons. A flight of 5 A400Ms could transport 5 Class A vehicles; alternatively, they could carry 4 Class A vehicles, 4 sets of Class C protection modules, and some additional equipment.

Network centric warfare capability. The Puma’s benefits from Germany’s world-renowned optronics industry, and uses the Leopard tank’s “hunter-killer” system that lets the gunner and commander acquire targets separately, and then automatically slews the turret to the designated victim upon handover. The hunter killer system is based on fiber glass optical transmission, and PUMA’s electrical architecture uses an “Open-Can-Bus-System” modular design with CPUs and I/O modules designed to be replaceable for future upgrades.

The vehicle will be compatible with Germany’s FuInfoSys battlefield C2 system, and its IdZ future infantryman setup, while IFF(identification, friend or foe) systems assist with combat identification.

A 170kW flywheel generator supplies power for the Puma’s various electrical systems, and the vehicle has enough battery capacity for temporary engine shut down. Long overwatch roles using its advanced sensors and communications will force the crew to run the engine in idle mode, however, in order to maintain power. PSM could not break through that limitation, but they strove to ensure low noise and fuel consumption when this option is used.

On the training side, PSM does offer a simulator and consoles, but embedded training also ensures that the Puma functions as its own simulator when requested. Maintenance functions have their own simulation packages.

Sustainability under extreme climatic conditions and inadequate infrastructural conditions. Recent operations have emphasized the importance of good air conditioning in vehicles; it’s hard to function when temperatures hit 50C/140F inside. Onboard BITE (Built in Test Equipment) “prognostics” monitor vehicle systems, and can warn of problems before they show up as system failures.

Beyond BITE, interactive electronic technical documentation is available with advice for troubleshooting, maintenance, and repairs. So is a parts catalog that includes options for Mission Support Kits of specific spares and consumables, together with special tool kits. This is the German definition of “sustainability under inadequate infrastructural conditions,” after all, not the Russian one.

Puma IFV: Project and Industrial Organization

The Bundestag set the project in motion in September 2002 when it awarded a development contract for the new IFV. To address this need, German armored vehicle leaders Rheinmetall & KMW formed a 50/50 joint venture called Projekt System & Management GmbH in 2002. Typically, their goal was to produce the world’s best IFV, with a range of features that would give it an unmatched ability to cope with current and future threats.

The initial development contract was followed by a 2004 order for 5 pre-series vehicles and related services, which are currently undergoing intensive trials, and by a November 2007 production order. Both Krauss-Maffei Wegmann and Rheinmetall hailed the production decision as “a crucial step in reequipping the German Army for the future as well as being vitally important to the German defence industry and a whole host of medium-sized subcontractors.”

PSM would not elaborate on the exact list, but said that over 50 subcontractors were involved. The first serially produced PUMA are scheduled to enter service in 2010.

Overall, PSM has certainly produced Germany’s next IFV, creating a top-of-the line vehicle in its class. The translation into market leadership may prove more perilous. In order to find customers beyond their home country, PSM’s Puma must compete with advanced, versatile tracked competitors like BAE’s popular CV90 and its variants, Russia’s BMP-3, and South Korea’s amphibious K-21 NIFV. It must also compete with the lighter wheeled APCs that have become so popular in Europe, despite their terrain limitations. The German order for 350 vehicles will give the Puma a strong base, but European buys of competing vehicles to date, Asian competitors, America’s “not invented here” approach to major weapons, and Germany’s restrictive export policies are likely to make export sales challenging.

Puma IFV: Contracts & Key Events

2018

June 8/18: Severe delays The German Bundesrechnungshof, an agency comparable to the US Government Accountability Office is warning that the federal procurement of the new Puma infantry fighting vehicle will take years longer than previously thought. The Puma is jointly developed in a joint venture between Kraus-Maffei Wegmann and Rheinmetall. Rheinmetall is responsible for the development and design of the chassis. The vehicle is operated by a crew of three and carries up to eight equipped troops in the rear troop compartment. The vehicle is of modular construction which allows it to be fully air transportable on an A400M aircraft. The Puma is armed with a remotely controlled weapon station, developed by Kraus-Maffei Wegmann, which is fitted with a dual feed Mauser 30mm MK 30-2 cannon. Rheinmetall is responsible for the integration of the Mauser cannon and the ammunition handling system. At the current rate the integration of all required features into the platform will take until 2029, meaning that German ground forces will have to rely on the predecessor tank, the 40-some-year-old Marder. Preparations for sustaining the Marder beyond its envisioned end of life in 2025 are already underway, including retrofitting the vehicles with the MELLS anti-tank weapon.

2015

July 28/15: The German Army has officially received its Puma Infantry Fighting Vehicles (IFV) from Rheinmetall and Krauss-Maffei Wegmann, following the fleet’s approval [German] in May, along with a delivery of seven vehicles as a training contingent. The German BWB procurement agency placed an order for 405 of the vehicles in July 2009 to replace the Bundeswehr’s fleet of Marder IFVs, subsequently revising the number down to 350 in July 2012. The full force of Puma vehicles is expected to be completed by 2020, with batches currently being received and passed to units for training before returning to home bases.

May 8/15: The German Army has approved [German] the Puma Infantry Fighting Vehicle for service, with seven vehicles forming an initial training contingent. The Puma will replace the current in-service Marder IFV, with the Germans placing an order for 405 Pumas in July 2009.

June 12/14: Heat Trials. Rheinmetall announces that its Puma has successfully completed firing and mobility trials in the UAE, in temperatures that ranged between 35-50C in the shade. The MK30-2/ABM automatic 30mm cannon and the MG4 7.62 machine gun both performed well in stationary and moving firing trials, the air conditioning system held up well and efficiently, and mobility trials went well in sand dunes, steep loose-surface tracks, and a rocky desert streambed.

With the completion of cold and hot-weather trials, the IFV is about ready for acceptance. Sources: Rheinmetall, “Puma stands up to heat and sand”.

Sept 17/13: Testing. German media report that testing at Germany’s Wehrteknik Dienstelle (WTD) testing center in Triel has revealed a number of design problems hampering the Puma IFV. Meanwhile, the program’s total estimated cost has risen to EUR 4.3 billion, which is a 39%/ EUR 1.2 billion jump beyond initial program figures.

Changes to the chassis have reportedly been required, with the number of wheel pairs raised from 5 to 6, and engine improvements have been necessary. Weight is reportedly an issue. Electronics are cited as inadequate to achieve the desired performance standards, and even weapon accuracy is questioned.

Meanwhile, German troops must continue using the Marder, which has limitations when fighting at night, and in counter-insurgency missions like Afghanistan where precise target identification is required. Sources: Volksfreund, “Ein Puma mit vielen Problemen” and “Bundeswehr-Panzer Puma wird 1,2 Milliarden Euro teurer”.

June 25/13: Upgrades. Germany will spend another EUR 500 million to develop the Puma after it finishes current trials, with most of these funds spent after 2017. Enhancements will reportedly include electronics upgrades, a remotely-operated machine gun station up top, and provision for anti-tank missiles.

The weapons upgrade will bring Puma to par with new unmanned IFV turrets, and with tracked IFV competitors like American Bradley and Russian BMP. Even the Marder IFVs Puma will replace can carry MBDA’s Milan anti-tank missiles. Sources: RP Online, “Schützenpanzer Puma soll aufgerüstet werden”.

Aug 18/11: USA. The U.S. Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI issues awards to 2 of 3 Ground Combat Vehicle bidders. BAE Systems and General Dynamics each win over $400 million in Technology Development Phase contracts, but the SAIC/KMW “Team Full Spectrum” bid, based on Germany’s highly-regarded Puma IFV, does not go forward. US Army.

Jan 21/11: USA. SAIC’s “Team Full Spectrum” for the US Ground Combat Vehicle IFV submits a Puma-derived design, again, in response to the renewed November 2010 solicitation. Boeing, Krauss-Maffei Wegmann and Rheinmetall Defence will be subcontractors. Boeing.

Dec 6/10: Testing. Rheinmetall and KMW hand over the first 2 Puma infantry fighting vehicles, on time, to the German BWB in Kassel for verification tests. This marks the first deliveries under the 405-vehicles contract for the German Armed Forces. Rheinmetall.

May 24/10: USA. Future Combat Systems’ two Lead Systems Integrators, Boeing and SAIC, team with KMW in a bid for the US Army’s next-generation IFV: The Ground Combat Vehicle program. GCV is now separate from Future Combat Systems, with the cancellation of FCS’ ground vehicle array in the FY 2010 budget. Boeing’s release states that:

“The team’s offering draws from the experience gained from the Manned Ground Vehicle and the Puma programs and will be built in the United States with a team of experienced American small and mid-tier supplier businesses.”

June 17/09: Formal approval of Puma IFV series production by the Federal Budget Committee of the German Parliament, as part of a larger package. Other elements of the approved defense package include 31 Trache 3a Eurofighters, 311 Spike-LR anti-armor missiles, 10 Wiesel 2 vehicles, and 5 minehnter ships. Sources: defpro.

Nov 17/08: Canada. Canada is reportedly looking to buy an IFV, and Germany’s Puma is reportedly a contender. Nevertheless, the Puma’s delivery schedule, pre-operational status, and lack of an in-place fleet available for immediate interim lease all weigh heavily against the vehicle’s chances.

In the end, no-one wins. Canada ends up canceling the CCV program more than once, and never buys anything.

Dec 10/07: Sub-contractors. Tognum AG subsidiary MTU Friedrichshafen announces that is about to receive the biggest single defense order in its history. With the Puma’s final tests scheduled for August 2008, MTU estimates that that the full order for the delivery of 405 drive systems with 10V 890 diesel engines will be placed by the end of 2008. “The order volume will probably amount to EUR 350 million and delivery will start in 2010.”

Nov 8/07: The German Bundestag’s budget committee clears the way for the procurement of 405 new Puma infantry fighting vehicles from PSM in Kassel, Germany. Rheinmetall AG in Dusseldorf and Krauss-Maffei Wegmann GmbH & Co. KG in Munich will effectively split a combined total of some EUR 3 billion (about $4.2 billion) in gross sales. Klaus Eberhardt, Chairman of the Executive Board of Rheinmetall AG, said that:

“This is the biggest single order in the history of our company, and definitely confirms our status as Europe’s top supplier of army technology.”

See: Rheinmetall release | KMW release.

May 5/06: PSM’s new PUMA infantry fighting vehicle is presented to the public during the Bundeswehr’s 50-year anniversary celebrations in Munster. Rheinmetall release.

Dec 20/05: Rollout. A prototype of the new AIFV Puma for the German Army was unveiled and presented to the German BWB contracting authority. PSM GmbH has thus met an important contractual milestone with the presentation of the so-called system demonstrator. Rheinmetall release.

Additional Readings & Sources

• Projekt System und Management GmbH (PSM) official site.
• KMW – Puma Infantry Fighting Vehicles.
• Rheinmetall – Armoured Tracked Vehicles. Includes Marder and Puma.
• Rheinmetall (February 2005) – The new Infantry Fighting Vehicle Puma: An investment in security.
• Defense Update – Multifunction Self Protection System (MUSS).
• EADS (Aug 10/07) – EADS Technology Protects German Armed Forces’ Puma Armoured Vehicles.
• Rheinmetall – Marder M1A3. 2010 snapshot.

Peer Competitors

• Singapore MINDEF – BIONIX II : Capabilities and Technical Specifications. See also ST Kinetics’ Bionix brochure [PDF], and a fine Wikipedia article. Bionix is much lighter, optimized for the conditions and terrain prevailing in SE Asia, and will serve beside Singapore’s new Leopard 2A4 tanks.
• Army Technology – Bradley M2 / M3 Tracked Armoured Fighting Vehicles, USA.
• DID Spotlight article – “The US Army’s Bradley Remanufacture Program.” Details re: current upgrades.
• Army Technology – CV90 Tracked Armoured Combat Vehicles, Sweden (BAE Hagglunds)
• KOIS – Next-generation armored vehicles to be deployed by 2008. Covers plans for the new XK-21 amphibious IFV, or KNIFV. Wikipedia also has a good article.

Search Tags: pumaifv

Navistar subsidiary International Military and Government LLC (IMG) in, Warrenville, IL has won billions of dollars in MRAP program contracts, to produce several variants of its blast-resistant vehicles. The Category I MRUV vehicle’s role is similar to a Hummer’s, albeit with more carrying capacity and much more protection. That has become a staple for IMG’s entry, dubbed the “MaxxPro” by its manufacturer. Their collaboration with an Israeli firm who provides up-armored vehicles for the Marines successfully overcame lukewarm initial interest, but even successful survivors of Aberdeen’s tests where challenged to offer enough protection against the ERP class of land mines that began to appear in Iraq.

Nevertheless, the MRAP program became a production race – and Navistar did very well under those competitive terms. In the end the military’s desire for standardization of its fleets exerted something of a gravitation pull on the competition. A July 2007 order vaulted Navistar into 1st place for initial MRAP Program vehicles ordered, but the US Army is divesting many of its vehicles – creating opportunities for foreign buyers…

MRAP Competitors, Navistar Totals

Navistar ended up leading the initial MRAP competition, with the highest share of any competitor at 38.3%. Additional orders for Afghan-adapted vehicles ensure that this total has crept higher vis-a-vis their original competitors, but They’re still just one competitor among many, and beyond the MRAP competition, trucking rival Oshkosh’s M-ATV has now achieved very close production figures in the follow-on, single-award M-ATV program.

To date, Navistar has produced 7 MaxxPro variants under contract: the original MaxxPro, MaxxPro Air Force, the MaxxPro Plus with improved protection, MaxxPro ambulance (production orders were for the Dash variant), MaxxPro MEAP, the MaxxPro Dash for Afghan operations, and the MaxxPro Recovery Vehicle (MRV), for towing out stuck vehicles. The firm has also developed Cargo flatbed and Tractor (18-wheeler truck’s front end, but mine-protected) variants.

A number of these MaxxPro vehicles have also received independent suspension upgrades, in order to improve their off-road performance. The MaxxPro DXM upgrade kits are delivered through Boler’s Hendrickson subsidiary, and marry Hendrickson’s advanced engineered sub-frames, sway-bars, coil springs and shocks with GD AxleTech’s 5000 Series Independent Suspension Axle System.

Participants in the MRAP and related programs, and their vehicles, have included:

Based on awarded contracts, MaxxPro’s price per base vehicle is around $520,000 – $550,000. The vehicles must then be fitted with electronics, IED jammers, and other equipment. That can add hundreds of thousands of dollars to that base price, before they’re sent to the front lines. Announced production orders to date include:

• #001: 4 initial testing vehicles
  
• #002: 1,200 MRAP CAT I vehicles
  
• #003: 16 larger MRAP CAT II vehicles
  
• #004: 754 CAT I
  
• #005: 1,000 CAT I
  
• #006: 1,500 CAT I
  
• #007: 743 CAT I
  
• #008: 4 CAT I – not publicly announced
  
• #009: 822 CAT I MaxxPro Dash
  
• #010: 400 CAT I MaxxPro Dash
  
• #014: 1,050 CAT I MaxxPro Dash DXM with improved suspensions. Modification added 1,222 DXM retrofits.
  
• #015: 250 MaxxPro MRV recovery/tow variants
  
• #016: 175 CAT I MaxxPro Dash DXM with ECP I/II
  
• #018: 250 MaxxPro Dash Ambulance with DXM and ECP IV
  
• #019?: 471 MaxxPro Dash DXM with ECPs
  
• #020: ISS retrofit kits: 650 DXM Plus
  
• #021: 140 MaxxPro MRV recovery/tow variants
  
• #023: Full “rolling chassis” retrofits: 2,717

Total production is currently 8,779 vehicles. Beyond American buys, Navistar informs DID that their production totals include a 2009 order from Singapore for 15 MaxxPro Dash vehicles, and they have also announced a May 2010 order for a pool of 80 MaxxPro Dash vehicles to support “coalition forces” in Afghanistan, which has reportedly included Albania, Croatia, Estonia, Greece, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Solvakia, and South Korea.

As the USA withdrew from Iraq and Afghanistan, they decided not to keep many of their MRAP vehicles. Quite a few Oshkosh M-ATVs and Navistar MaxxPros will still remain in the force, but many MRAPs of all types won’t remain. The question is where they end up. Some have been destroyed outright, in order to avoid paying to ship them home. A number of MRAPs, including MaxxPros, have been diverted to local government organizations in the USA. Giving mine-protected, heavily armored vehicles to entities like school districts and non-violent towns of under 10,000 people has caused no small amount of controversy, and citizen protests have even forced a small handful of local governments to cancel these “1033 program” giveaways, which are not centrally tracked or accounted for. Other MRAPs have been given or sold to foreign operators, reportedly including:

• Croatia: 40
  
• Hungary: 42
  
• Jordan: 100
  
• Pakistan: 22 deployed, 160 requested
  
• Slovakia: ??
  
• UAE: 3,375 requested

A Note on MRAPs

DID refers to the MaxxPro as the top finisher in the MRAP competition, despite greater sales by Oshkosh’s M-ATV (MRAP All-Terrain Vehicle).

That’s because the M-ATV wasn’t part of the initial MRAP program; instead, it’s a follow-on competition that aimed to bridge the gap to the future JLTV winner. Navistar’s MaxxPro competed, but Oshkosh won, and their M-ATV was also very popular. In June 2010, its order totals narrowly surpassed the Navistar MaxxPro’s. DID defines “MRAP orders” as orders placed under the original MRAP multi-vendor contracts, however, and considers the single-vendor M-ATV competition to be a separate but related effort.

MaxxPro Contracts & Key Events

Unless otherwise specified, all contracts are issued to Navistar subsidiary International Military and Government LLC (now Navistar Defense LLC) in Warrenville, IL. Unless otherwise noted, the Marine Corps Systems Command in Quantico, VA buys MRAP vehicles on behalf of 2008 requests from the US Army (12,000 by 2008), USMC (2,225), Air Force (558), Navy (544), SOCOM (344), and production verification testing (100). Those numbers rose further, via additional awards in 2010 and 2011, but the US military

March 12/17: Navistar has been contracted more than $475 million by the US Contracting Command in order to produce and support 40 armored vehicles for Pakistan and to upgrade 1,085 armored vehicles for the United Arab Emirates. The vehicles destined for Pakistan later this year are the company’s MaxxPro Dash DXM Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicle which features an armored wheeled vehicle with a V-shaped hull to deflect mine blasts. For the UAE, Navistar will provide the long wheel base MaxxPro MRAPs which are being acquired by the UAE under the US Excess Articles program and will be delivered in 2018.

February 19/17: Navistar Defense has been contracted $35 million by the US DoD to provide 40 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected MaxxPro Dash DXM vehicles. The deal supports foreign military sales for the government of Pakistan and work is expected to be complete by the end of October 2018. MaxxPro Dash DXM vehicles feature a V-shaped hull to deflect IED explosions away from the vehicle and are built to withstand ballistic arms fire and mine blasts. Pakistan will use the vehicles to protect troops against attacks from jihadist militants and other insurgents operating between Pakistan and Afghanistan.

September 11/15: US firm Navistar Defense has been contracted to supply the Afghan National Security Forces with nearly 2,300 mine resistant, ambush protected (MRAP) vehicles, based on the company’s 7000-MV platform, according to a company press release. The US Army Contracting Command handed the company a $369 million contract for the vehicles, which will bring the total number of Navistar vehicles sent to the Afghan government to nearly 9,000. The company has also exported the 7000-MV platform to Iraq. The new MRAPs will reportedly serve in a variety of roles, including ammunition, fuel and troop transport.

Sept 12/14: Ambulance upgrades. Navistar Defense LLC in Lisle, IL receives a $44 million contract modification to buy MaxxPro Long Wheeled Base Ambulance Medical Equipment Set A-Kits, MaxxPro Survivability Upgrade Kits, and Spring Suspension System Kits. All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2012 and FY 2014 US Army budgets.

Work is expected to finish by Aug 31/15, and will be performed in Lisle, IL. The US Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI manages the contract (W56HZV-12-G-0006, PO 0002).

July 25/14: Survivability upgrades. Navistar Defense LLC in Lisle, IL receives a $27.6 million contract modification for kits to upgrade MaxxPro Dash and long-wheel base ambulances to their final configuration. $21.7 million in FY 2012 and FY 2014 US Army budgets are committed immediately.

Work is expected to finish by May 30/15, and will be performed in Lisle, IL. The US Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI manages the contract (W56HZV-12-G-0006, PO 001).

Dec 23/13: Support. Navistar Defense LLC in Lisle, IL receives a $6.9 million contract modification for MaxxPro field service support in the continental United States and overseas. All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2014 US Army O&M budgets.

Work is expected to finish by Dec 31/14, and will be performed in Lisle, IL and Afghanistan. Bids were solicited via the Internet, with 1 received by US Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI (W56HZV-10-C-0011, PO 0086).

Nov 4/13: Support. Navistar Defense LLC in Lisle, IL receives a $7.3 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract, covering MaxxPro M1235A3 Dash MSU (MaxxPro Survivability Upgrade) engineering, logistic and travel support for the acquisition of the contract data requirements list, and program and logistics support. The contractor shall include MSU content as well as variation in vehicle content for both the objective gunner protection kit manned turret and M153 CROWS remote-controlled weapon turret. All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2013 US Army budgets.

Work will be performed in Lisle, IL, with an expected completion date of December 2014. One bid was solicited, with 1 received by the US Army TACOM in Warren, MI (W56HZV-10-C-0011). Note that the exact same award was announced on Oct 31/13.

June 18/13: Survivability upgrades. Navistar Defense LLC in Lisle, IL receives an $18.2 million firm-fixed-price contract modification, increasing the funds available for the MaxxPro Survivability Upgrade to $152.3 million. FY 2011 & 2012 Procurement funds are being used by Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI (W56HZV-12-C-0404, PO 0013).

June 3/13: Report. Navistar Defense LLC in Lisle, IL receives an $8.9 million cost-plus-fixed-fee, multi-year contract modification, for MaxxPro field services representatives. The cumulative total face value of this contract is now $49.8 million. Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI manages the contract (W56HZV-10-C-0011, PO 0071).

Jan 7/13: Survivability upgrades. Navistar Defense LLC in Lisle, IL receives a $10.6 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification for MaxxPro maintenance services.

Work will be performed in Lisle, IL; Yuma, AZ; Aberdeen, MD; and Afghanistan; with an estimated completion date of March 25/13. One bid was solicited, with one bid received by US Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI (W56HZV-10-C-0011).

Sept 24/12: Survivability upgrades. Navistar Defense LLC in Lisle, IL receives a $138.2 million firm-fixed-price contract modification to buy MaxxPro Survivability Upgrade Kits, Vehicle Emergency Egress Windows, and MaxxPro support services.

Work will be performed in Lisle and Springfield, OH, with an estimated completion date of Sept 13/13. One bid was solicited, with one bid received by US Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI (W56HZV-12-C-0404).

Sept 19/12: Survivability upgrades. Navistar Defense, LLC announces a maximum $282 million delivery order to provide more than 2,300 survivability upgrade retrofit kits for their MaxxPro Dash MRAP vehicles, plus parts and service. Work for the survivability upgrade will be done in Afghanistan beginning in December 2012, and is scheduled to be complete by July 2013.

Navistar says they have now delivered nearly 9,000 MaxxPro units in 9 major variants to all customers.

July 30/12: Spares. Navistar Defense in Lisle, IL receives a maximum $8.6 million fixed-price with economic price adjustment contract from the US Army for MaxxPro spares. Work will be performed in Illinois and Kentucky, using FY 2012 Army Working Capital Funds. There was 1 proposal with 3 responses. The date of performance completion is July 29/13. The Defense Logistics Agency Land and Maritime in Columbus, OH (SPM7LX-12-D-9007).

July 13/12: RPG nets. Navistar Defense in Lisle, IL receives a $59.4 million firm-fixed-price contract for 1,357 rocket propelled grenade net kits, which means QinetiQ’s Q-Net. Work will be performed in Springfield, OH, with an estimated completion date of Oct 31/12. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received by US Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI (W56HZV-12-C-0201).

March 13/12: A $21.3 million firm-fixed-price contract for “the long wheel rolling chassis upgrade with independent suspension on the MaxxPro [MRAP] and transportation fixtures.” Vid. Jan 9/12 entry for the full explanation; this the installation work associated with its January order to upgrade 2,717 vehicles.

Work will be performed in West Point, MS, with an estimated completion date of May 20/12. One bid was solicited, with one bid received, by US Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI (W56HZV-12-C-0130).

Feb 20/12: Sub-contract. Boler subsidiary Hendrickson in Kendallville, IN and GD subsidiary AxleTech International in Oshkosh, WI get a sub-contract from Navistar Defense, LLC, to equip 2,717 MaxxPro Long Wheel Base (LWB) MRAP vehicles with independent suspension systems, per the $900 million Jan 9/12 contract.

Deliveries began in January 2012, and will be completed in October 2013. GD release.

Jan 24/12: A $109.5 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order for 650 MaxxPro DXM Plus kits. Orders #002-008 add up to 5,217 vehicles. These kits, plus the “rolling chassis” order, add up to 3,367 retrofits.

Work will be performed at the MRAP Sustainment Facility in Kuwait, and is expected to be complete by the end of October 2012. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12 (M67854-07-D-5032, #0020).

Jan 17/12: DOT&E – MRV issues. The Pentagon releases the FY2011 Annual Report from its Office of the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E). The MaxxPro Dash ISS and MaxxPro MRV are both included, but get very different grades. While the MRV towing and recovery vehicle passed blast and live fire testing:

“…the Navistar MRV is not operationally effective and not operationally suitable for recovery operations on cross-country terrain. The Navistar MRV has poor mobility and poor combat towing to recover damaged MRAP vehicles in Afghanistan. The vehicle could not maneuver in soft sandy soil and had difficulty accelerating on hilly terrain. The Navistar MRV demonstrated 271 MMBOMF [Mean Miles Between Operational Mission Failure] versus its operational requirement of 600 MMBOMF. These problems should have been resolved… prior to the [Limited User Test]. The Navistar MRV is [only] capable of recovering and towing damaged MRAP vehicles on flat improved roads.”

The MaxxPro Dash ISS, on the other hand, is declared to be both operationally effective and reliable. Its figure of 1,259 MMBOMF was way above its operational requirement of 600.

Jan 9/12: An $879.9 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order for the procurement of 2,717 MaxxPro “rolling chassis”; 10 engineering change proposals; and 25 contract data requirements lists, for MaxxPro MRAPs.

This is the 3rd step in commonizing the MaxxPro fleet. The first step was the addition of DXM independent suspension in February 2009, which has appeared on all orders after #0014. It was followed in March 2010 by 1,222 DXM retrofit kits. Now, the rolling chassis is the 3rd step, which upgrades most of the earlier MaxxPros with the latest vehicle capabilities. We asked Navistar, who explained that “rolling chassis” replaces the chassis base, adding the DXM independent suspension, a new MaxxForce 9.3 engine, and a 570 amp alternator and driveline. The crew cab is essentially lifted off the old chassis, and bolted on to a new one.

Work will be performed in West Point, MS, and is expected to be complete by the end of October 2013. All funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12 (M67854-07-D-5032, DO #0023).

Jan 9/11: Oshkosh control fight. Icahn’s proxy skirmish at Oshkosh turns into a war, with hard-hitting submissions to shareholders from both Icahn’s group and Board slate, and from Oshkosh’s existing management and Board. If Icahn gets his Board slate elected, spinoffs and a merger of Oshkosh Defense with Navistar become far more likely.

In that scenario, it’s likely that the Maxxpro would take a back seat to the M-ATV in the future firm’s lineup. Oshkosh 8-K | Oshkosh management’s SEC DEFA14A filing (see esp. pp. 38-44) | Icahn Group DFAN14A arguments.

Dec 20/11: A $133.7 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order under a previously awarded contract for 514 field service representatives to support Navistar’s MRAPs. Queries to Navistar confirmed the contract’s size, and their response noted that it included supplies as well as personnel.

Work will be performed in Afghanistan and Kuwait (94%) and the United States (6%), and is expected to be complete by Dec 31/12. FY 2012 operations and maintenance appropriation funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/11 (M67854-07-D-5032, #0022).

Dec 19/11: $9.6 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order for MaxxPro MRV recovery vehicle contractor support, esp. re: the contract data requirements list (CDRLs).

Work will be performed in Warrenville, IL, and is expected to be complete by the end of February 2014, but all funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12. The original contract was competitively procured (M67854-07-D-5032, Delivery Order 0015 under Modification 16).

Dec 6/11: Navistar/Oshkosh merger? Billionaire Carl Icahn owns 10% of Navistar, and 9.51% of Oshkosh, so his comments that the 2 companies should merge draws a lot of attention. He tells CNBC:

“I definitely think it would be a good merger. I think there would be a lot of synergy. I own stock in both and I think shareholders of both companies would benefit.”

Both Boards of Directors are maneuvering defensively around Icahn. Navistar agreed to put its Board up for election each year, but agreed not to propose his own slate of directors at the annual meeting. Things are a bit more open at Oshkosh, where Icahn is proposing Board slates, and has been increasingly critical of existing management.

July 15/11: A $142 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order for 140 MaxxPro Recovery Vehicles (MRVs), plus sustainment, spares and support. That brings total MRV orders to 315. Work will be performed in West Point, MS, and is expected to be complete by the end of November 2011 (M67854-07-D-5032, #0021). See also Navistar release.

July 14/11: Boler subsidiary Hendrickson, and General Dynamics’ AxleTech International, announce 2 contracts from Navistar Defense, LLC to equip 471 MaxxPro blast-resistant vehicles (vid. June 13/11 entry), and 250 MaxxPro Dash ambulances (vid. May 4/11 entry), with independent suspension systems. Their DXM solution uses AxleTech’s 5000 Series Independent Suspension Axle System, and Hendrickson’s engineered sub-frame.

Production work began in June 2011 at Hendrickson in Kendallville, IN, and AxleTech in Oshkosh, WI. Deliveries will be complete in September 2011. GD-ATP.

June 13/11: Navistar Defense:

“Navistar Defense, LLC today announced that it received a $357 million delivery order for an additional 471 International MaxxPro Dash vehicles with DXM independent suspension. The order from the U.S. Marine Corps Systems Command follows last month’s delivery order for 250 MaxxPro Dash Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) ambulances.”

Subsequent events indicate that this is probably delivery order #0019.

May 16/11: An $18.6 million delivery order modification for installation of ambulance engineering change proposals (ECP) and Dash Phase IV ECPs on the recent order of 250 ambulances. Work will be performed in Afghanistan, and is expected to be complete by the end of September 2011 (M67854-07-D-5032, #0018, mod #0001).

May 4/11: A $183.3 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order for 250 MaxxPro Dash Ambulance vehicles, with improved DXM independent suspensions. Work will be performed in West Point, MS, and is expected to be complete by the end of September 2011. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/11 (M67854-07-D-5032, #0018).

This is the 1st order for the ambulance variant, which was unveiled in October 2010 at AUSA (vid. Oct 25/10 entry). These Maxxpros will serve alongside the similar Oshkosh M-ATV ambulances in theater, and will be supplemented by BAE’s heavier 6×6 RG-33 HAGA MRAP. These vehicles are a component in the Pentagon’s broad ‘Golden Hour’ initiative, which aims to begin providing life-saving care within the critical 1st hour of major trauma. See also Navistar Defense release.

April 28/11: Navistar Defense, LLC in Warrenville, IL received a $13.2 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order for field service representatives (FSR) in Kuwait, to sustain operation of the MaxxPro Dash MRAPs in Afghanistan.

Work is expected to be completed by the end of November 2011, but all contracted funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/11 (M67854-07-D-5032, #0017).

March 4/11: Navistar Defense, LLC in Warrenville, IL receives a $32.5 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order to buy MRAP Recovery Vehicle contractor logistics support for spare parts, basic initial issue tool kits and training support. Work will be performed in Louisville, KY (96%), and Warrenville, IL (4%), and is expected to be complete by the end of September 2011 (M67854-07-D-5032, #0015 Mod 005).

Dec 9/10: A $123.4 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order for 175 CAT I MaxxPro Dash vehicles with improved DXM suspensions, plus MaxxPro Dash Engineer Change Proposal (ECP) Phase I & II kits; and support items including associated unique base issue items for the fleet; and independent suspension system deprocessing parts kits. The order raises Navistar’s total orders for the MaxxPro family to 8,014.

Work will be performed in West Point, MS, and is expected to be complete by the end of June 2011. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 31/10 (M67854-07-D-5032, #0016). See also Navistar release.

Nov 19/10: A $252.8 million firm-fixed-price delivery order for 250 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected recovery vehicles (MRV) and contractor logistics support (CLS). Work will be performed in West Point, MS, and is expected to be complete by the end of September 2011. All contract funds will expire at the end of the fiscal year on Sept 30/11 (M67854-07-D-5032, #0015).

A blast-protected recovery vehicle makes a great deal of sense, in an environment where a leading cause of disabled vehicles is IED land mine explosions. Navistar originally unveiled the MRV/ wrecker variant in February 2009, and had competition in this area from BAE’s RG-33 MRRMV. See also Navistar release.

Oct 25/10: Navistar Defense, LLC announces 2 new variants at the Association of the United States Army (AUSA) Annual Meeting and Exposition: the MaxxPro ambulance kit, and the MaxxPro Tractor variant.

The ambulance kit will fit into any MaxxPro variant, and include a litter assist system that helps load stretchers. The MaxxPro tractor, meanwhile, is not a farm implement. It’s the truck half of a blast resistant tractor-trailer rig.

Oct 7/10: The Romanian Ministry of National Defence announces that the first 8 MRAPs have just been supplied to the 811th “Dragonii Transilvani” Maneuver Battalion and the 812th “Soimii Carpatilor” Maneuver Battalion, deployed in Zabul Province, Afghanistan.

These are the first of 60 vehicles provided by the USA, and the lot reportedly consists of 20 new and 40 refurbished MaxxPro Dash vehicles, with improved DXM suspensions. Romanian MND | defpro | Jane’s.

Sept 23/10: A $9.9 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order modification (M67854-07-D-5032, #0011) for field service representatives (FSRs)/instructors/mechanic services outside the continental United States (OCONUS) to sustain operation of the Dash vehicles in Afghanistan, and FSR/instructors inside the continental United States for replacement center training in Fort Benning, GA.

Work is expected to be complete by the end of September 2011, and all contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/10.

Sept 23/10: A $13 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order modification (M67854-07-D-5032, #0014) that pays federal retail excise tax on 148 MaxxPro Dash vehicles being used in the continental United States for training purposes. Work will be performed in Warrenville, IL, and is expected to be complete by the end of September 2011. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/10.

Sept 17/10: A $25.2 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order modification for instructor and field service representative (FSR) support in the United States (CONUS), outside the continental United States (OCONUS); The objective of the FSRs/instructors is to sustain operation of the Dash vehicles in support of Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan. Navistar will also send more FSRs and instructors to Mine Resistant Ambush Protected University and CONUS Replacement Center Training.

Work will be performed in West Point, MS, and is expected to be complete by the end of September 2011 (M67854-07-D-5032, #0011).

Aug 24/10: The US Congressional Research Service releases the latest version [PDF] of its report “Mine-Resistant, Ambush-Protected (MRAP) Vehicles: Background and Issues for Congress. Excerpts:

“As of June 28, 2010, more than 8,500 MRAPs had reportedly been shipped to Afghanistan, with over 3,500 of those being the newer M-ATVs. The Army has recently said that it will begin development of yet another MRAP version – the “Ultra-Lite MRAP” – which raises questions about possible vehicle redundancies. The Marines, although voicing support for the M-ATV program, have retrofitted a number of MRAPs with new suspension systems and reportedly are satisfied with the results. This apparent success calls into question not only if the Marines need all of the M-ATVs allocated to them by DOD but also if the Marines’ retrofitted suspension system might be a more cost-effective alternative for the other services… Among potential issues for congressional consideration are the status of almost 5,000 MRAPS in Afghanistan that are reportedly not being used because of their size and weight.”

In terms of overall budgets:

“Through FY2010, Congress appropriated $34.95 billion for all versions of the MRAP. In March 2010, DOD reprogrammed an additional $3.9 billion from the Overseas Contingency Operations fund to MRAP procurement. Congress approved an additional $1.2 billion for MRAP procurement, included in the FY2010 Supplemental Appropriations Act (P.L. 111-212). The full FY2011 DOD budget request of $3.4 billion for the MRAP Vehicle Fund has been authorized by the House (H.R. 5136).”

June 29/10: A $13.4 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order, modification #03 under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #0014) to buy spare parts related to the order for 1,050 improved suspension MaxxPros. These include suspension system authorized stockage list parts, prescribed load list parts, battle damage assessment repair, and deprocessing; the DASH engineering change proposal (ECP) Phase III upgrade; the remote weapon station system upgrade; and unique collateral material/BII. Work will be performed in West Point, MS, and is expected to be complete by the end of January 2011.

June 14/10: A $60 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order for spare parts to maintain the DXM off-road independent suspension system that is being retrofitted to the entire fleet of 1,222 MaxxPro DASH vehicles. The new DXM systems are provided by Hendrickson Truck Suspension Systems and AxleTech International.

Work will be performed in Warrenville, IL, and is expected to be complete by the end of March 2011. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/10 (M67854-07-D-5032, #0013).

June 14/10: A $17.2 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order for Navistar field service representatives in the Central Command area of responsibility. Work will be performed in Kuwait, Afghanistan and Iraq, and is expected to be complete by the end of June 2011.

May 28/10: Stolen IP? ATS litigation controversy. Armor Technologies, Inc. of South Africa launches the “MRAP Ripoff” web site, and issues a statement, after 3 years of litigation with Navistar. The ancillary web site details the company’s claims, which are summed up via these chosen excerpts from its statement:

“ATS believes it was tricked into transferring unique knowledge, technology and IP about mine-protected vehicles (MPVs) to Chicago-based Navistar Defense, during their relationship from March 2005 to January 2007… At issue is ATS’ belief that it has been hoodwinked into providing critical knowledge and technology on MPVs to Navistar, which before the start of its relationship with ATS in March 2005 had no such expertise… Navistar later claimed in the International Court of Arbitration that Plasan Sasa was the origin of the MaxxPro vehicle, but its own staff admitted to the court that the same team that worked with ATS on the ATS Oryx design, had secretly worked on MaxxPro simultaneously. Navistar can’t have it both ways: either the company illegally shared ATS’ knowledge with Plasan Sasa, which also had no previous MPV expertise, or it acted in exceedingly bad faith in terms of its agreements with ATS – which it then [summarily] broke once it had what it needed: the wherewithal to build a world-class mine-resistant troop carrier… In the meantime, Navistar has won U.S. Government tenders and funding… awarded tens of millions of dollars in U.S. Taxpayers’ money, and it is receiving lucrative foreign orders… none of which would have happened had the U.S. Government heeded its own policy not to do business with defense companies involved in related litigation… ATS’ matter has been taken up by the South African government, which in March [2010] formally requested an explanation from the U.S. Government on the matter.”

May 3/10: A $102.3 million firm-fixed- priced delivery order modification under a previously contract will buy various MaxxPro kits and parts to support operations in Afghanistan. Work will be performed in West Point, MS, and is expected to be complete by the end of October 2010. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/10 (M67854-07-D-5032, #0013). Parts include:

• 937 gunner restraints
  
• 3,251 120V wiring harnesses
  
• 5,722 rear ramp hydraulics, rear ramp hydraulic – non-reoccurring equipment (NRE)
  
• 3,251 rear ramp storage
  
• 2,630 fire support systems kits, fire support systems kits – NRE
  
• 5,716 air conditioning circulation switches
  
• 822 heating, ventilation, and air conditioning kits

March 15/10: A $178.3 million modification to delivery order #0013 under previously awarded firm-fixed priced contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for 1,222 independent suspension system kits and aluminum catcher plates for MaxxPro vehicles. MaxxPros use the DXM independent suspension solution provided by Hendrickson Truck Suspension Systems and AxleTech International.

Work will be performed in West Point, MS, and is expected to be complete by the end of March 2011. Navistar release

Feb 16/10: Looks like the new suspension system worked. Navistar Defense, LLC in Warrenville, IL receives a $751.5 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order #0014. This order will also be used to buy 1,050 MaxxPro Dash vehicles for Afghanistan, with the new DXM independent suspension solution provided by Hendrickson Truck Suspension Systems and AxleTech International.

Other improvements reportedly include door and insulation upgrades, as well as the addition of an inclinometer to act as a level and measures side slope during vehicle operation. The higher center of gravity involved with V-hull vehicles can make them tippy, so that’s definitely something for the driver to watch.

Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS and the contract is expected to be complete by the end of August 2010. The work is expected to add back 400 jobs at the company’s West Point, MS facility, following multiple layoffs in 2009 that had cut staffing to 120. All procurement funds will expire on Sept 30/12. This contract was competitively procured (M67854-07-D-5032 / D.O.0009). Since May 2007, Navistar says it has received orders for a total of 7,494 MaxxPro MRAPs. Navistar release | Daily Times Leader | Aviation Week Ares.

Dec 29/09: A $7 million firm-fixed-priced contract for “CAT III technical labor hour” work to support for the design and development of “the Maxxpro Dash vehicle independent suspension system,” later revelaed to be the Hendrickson/Axletech DXM. Work will be performed in Warrenville, IL, and is expected to be completed by the April 30/10 (M67854-07-D-5032).

The MaxxPro isn’t alone here. Oshkosh’s TAK-4 off-road independent suspension system has recently been used to retrofit MRAP vehicles from BAE Systems and Force Protection, in order to improve their mobility in Afghanistan’s rough terrain.

Nov 9/09: Navistar announces a 4-year System Technical Support (STS) contract worth up to $78 million to provide engineering support for its MaxxPro MRAP. Navistar’s STS award includes work to improve vehicle reliability, support combat issues encountered in theater, add new kits and hardware, as well as provide new vehicle enhancements. The STS award includes up to 143,000 annual labor hours, as well as parts, to be used within 12 months, with the option to renew the contract for 3 additional years.

Sept 09/09: A $48 million firm-fixed-priced modification to a previous delivery order (M67854-07-D-5032, #0004) for procurement of MRAP OCONUS field service representatives (FSRs), OCONUS senior instructors, FSR instructor/mechanics, and various contract data requirements lists.

Work will be performed in the United States and Iraq and will be completed in September 2010. Contract funds in the amount of $48 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The base contract was competitively awarded, and the new requirements are sole source additions to the contract.

Aug 10/09: A $7 million firm-fixed-priced modification under contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #0010) for the procurement of engineering change proposals and tire chains in support of MRAP MaxxPro Dash vehicles. Work will be performed in West Point, MS and is expected to be complete by the end of December 2009. The base contract was competitively awarded, and the new requirements are sole source additions to the contract.

Aug 7/09: A $7.8 million firm-fixed-priced modification to a previous delivery order (M67854-07-D-5032, #0006). It adds vehicle modifications (engineering change proposals), ambulance sustainment parts, and ambulance head clearance retrofit kits for Category I MRAP vehicles.

Work will be performed in West Point, MS and is expected to be complete by the end of December 2009. The base contract was competitively awarded, and the new requirements are sole source additions to the contract.

Aug 6/09: An $8.6 million firm-fixed-priced modification to a previous delivery order (M67854-07-D-5032, #0004) for MRAP OCONUS (Outside the CONtinental US) field service representatives (FSRs), new equipment training instructors, CONUS FSR instructors, and senior FSRs.

Work will be performed in the United States and Iraq, and will end at the end of September 2010. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, at the end of September 2009. The base contract was competitively awarded, and the new requirements are sole source additions to the contract.

July 16/09: A $21 million firm fixed priced delivery order under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #009) for additional initial sustainment items in support of 882 MaxxPro Dash vehicles.

Work will be performed at the Red River Army Depot in Texarkana, TX, and deliveries are expected to be complete by Nov 30/09. Contract funds in the amount of $687,470 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year.

July 10/09: A $71.1 million firm-fixed- priced delivery order modification under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #006) for the procurement of battle damage assessment and repair (BDAR) kits for its MaxxPro Base and MaxxPro Plus vehicle variants.

Work will be performed at the Red River Army Depot in Texarkana, TX and deliveries are expected to be completed by Aug 1/09. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The new requirements are sole source additions to the original contract.

June 30/09: Navistar announces its disappointment at their M-ATV loss, while reiterating their firms’ strong points for investors. The firm did not enter a MaxxPro variant, choosing a derivative of the MXT Husky instead.

June 19/09: A $6.4 million modification to a previous delivery order (M67854-07-D-5032, #004) for the procurement of MRAP field service representative mechanics, back ramp retrofit kits, and several contract data requirement lists outside the USA. Despite the order’s size, the Pentagon release states that: “Contract funds in the amount of $7,291,171 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year.”

Work will be performed in West Point, MS and in Iraq, and work is expected to be complete in August 2010. The base contract was competitively awarded, and the new requirements are sole source additions to the contract.

June 18/09: A maximum $42.9 million firm-fixed-price, sole-source contract for sustainment spare parts in support of Army MRAP vehicles. Contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/09, but the contract will run until Nov 9/09. The Defense Logistics Agency Warren (DSCC-ZG) in Warren, MI manages this contract (SPRDL1-09-C-0088).

June 1/09: A $44.7 million firm-fixed-priced modification to a previously awarded delivery order (M67854-07-D-5032, #0004) for the renewal of Field Service Representative services in the Iraqi and Afghan theaters of war.

Work will be performed in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the final deliveries associated with this delivery order are expected to be completed by Sept 30/10. The Basic contract was competitively awarded and the new requirements were sole source additions to the contract.

April 27/09: A $16.5 million firm-fixed-priced modification to a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #004), for field service representatives for the Mine Resistance Ambush Protected vehicles in theater, Contract Data Requirement Lists (CDRLs), and ECP vehicle modifications.

Work will be performed in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the final deliveries associated with this delivery order are expected to be complete by Aug 16/10.

Feb 25/09: Navistar Defense, LLC unveils 3 new MaxxPro variants at the Association of the United States Army (AUSA) Winter Symposium and Exposition. The MaxxPro Wrecker MRAP vehicle is designed to retrieve damaged or mission-disabled MRAPs, winching them out of trouble and towing them away. Since breakdowns usually involve mined areas, a high level of blast protection is very important.

Navistar also added the MaxxPro Cargo, and the MaxxPro Tractor for towing trailers under full protection. All 3 utility vehicles are built on the company’s International WorkStar platform, with a MaxxPro Dash cab and MaxxForce D 9.3L I6 engine.

Dec 17/08: Navistar Defense LLC in Warrenville, IL received an $8.9 million modification under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #009) Engineering Change Proposal (ECP) upgrades for Enhanced Maneuverability and associated Non-Recurring Engineering (NRE) costs.

In English, it buys initial spare parts support packages for MaxxPro Dash vehicles, which have been modified for use in Afghanistan. Work will be performed in West Point, MS and is expected to be complete by the end of May 2009.

Dec 10/08: Navistar continues to pull away from its MRAP competitors, via a $362.3 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order for 400 more MaxxPro Dash vehicles, which have been modified for service in Afghanistan. Manufacturing under this previously awarded indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #0010) will be performed in WestPoint, MS and work is expected to be complete by the end of May 2009. Navistar will complete delivery of all 400 units while the testing and evaluation of vehicles for the MRAP All-Terrain Vehicle (M-ATV) program is underway.

Navistar’s release adds that delivery of the September 2008 order for 822 MaxxPro Dash vehicles is set to finish at the end of January 2009, a full month ahead of schedule.

Dec 4/08: A $53.6 million firm fixed priced modification to delivery order under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #0004: 754 CAT I MRAPS for $413.9 million) for spares and equipment items needed to support Category I MRAP vehicles in theater. This order will also be used to support the renewal of Field Service Representative contracts within the CENTCOM area of responsibility. Work will be managed in WestPoint, MS, and is expected to be complete in November 2009.

Nov 14/08: The US government issues a pre-solicitation notice for a subsidiary competition called M-ATV, essentially an “MRAP Lite” bridge buy to the JLTV. FBO pre-solicitation #W56HZV-09-R-0115. The MaxxPro Dash is likely to be a prime contender for the buy(s), which begins an expected order of just over 2,000 vehicles but could reach up to 10,000.

A subsequent Defense News article places M-ATV’s top weight at 12.5 tons empty, adding that the RFP still demands significant protection against conventional and EFP land mines. That’s likely to help the heavier MaxxPro Dash, while putting competitors like Force Protection’s 7-8 ton Cheetah at a disadvantage.

The RFP was issued in December 2008. A draft issued on Nov 25/08 stated that M-ATV would receive the same top-priority DX production rating employed by the original MRAP program, adding that the first vehicles are expected to be fielded in the fall of 2009.

UPDATE: By Q2 2009, Navistar had submitted its choice – but it wasn’t their Dash, it was a variant of their MXT light truck.

Nov 7/08: Another $24.8 million for 2 firm-fixed-priced delivery order modifications under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) The modifications would add gunner restraints, and cover funding costs associated with accelerated MRAP Category I production. Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS.

See Sept 4/08 entry for the $752 million order for 822 of Navistar’s lighter MaxxPro Dash vehicles, whose design has been lightened and modified for the Afghan front. On Nov 6/08, Navistar announced that by working around the clock, they were able to meet the military’s request to deliver all vehicles one month ahead of schedule. Originally scheduled to be completed by the end of February 2009, the company has leveraged its extensive relationships with its supply base to provide deliver all units by the end of January 2009. The firm delivered 70 vehicles on Nov 4/08 – 2 weeks in advance of its already aggressive delivery schedule.

That extra commitment isn’t free; the MRAP contract is structured to compensate manufacturers for their extra costs if the government needs vehicles faster.

Oct 29/08: Navistar Defense LLC (ND) in Warrenville, IL received a $56.4 million firm fixed priced delivery order under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #0007) for engineering changes and spares to support MRAP Category I vehicles currently in theater. Delivery order #0007 covered 743 MRAP CAT I vehicles.

Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS, and is expected to be complete by the end of November 2008. This contract was competitively procured.

Oct 29/08: Navistar Defense LLC (ND) in Warrenville, IL received $8.3 million for a firm-fixed-priced delivery order under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #0006) to fund additional Maintenance Workshop Blocks to support MRAP Category I vehicles currently in theater. Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS and is expected to be complete by the end of February 2009. This contract was competitively procured.

See also Dec 18/07, June 19/08, and Oct 7/08 entries re: delivery order #0006, which was for 1,500 vehicles.

Oct 24/08: Defense News reports that more mine-resistant vehicles could be in the order pipeline. The U.S. Army and Marine Corps reportedly plan to rapidly develop and buy a fleet of lighter 7-10 ton vehicles that offer better mine resistance than Hummers, but better off-road mobility than MRAPs. Afghanistan is seen as an especial focus for these vehicles.

Oshkosh’s Sandcat and Force Protection’s Cheetah vehicle are mentioned as potential candidates for that bridge buy. Other competitors are likely, and Navistar’s MaxxPro Dash must also be placed in this category given recent the MRAP orders for deployment of this lightened variant to Afghanistan (vid. Sept 4/08 entry).

Defense News places potential military demand at 2,000- 5,000 bridge buy vehicles – assuming that issues with JLTV issues don’t lead to the bridge becoming the road. Navistar may be covered either way, however; its partnership with BAE won one of the 3 JLTV development contracts.

Oct 7/08: A $35.9 million firm-fixed-priced modification to delivery order #0006 under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for sustainment items needed to support Category I MRAP vehicles in theater. This order will also be used to support several engineering change proposals to increase the vehicles’ capabilities. Work will be performed in West Point, MS and is expected to be complete in April 2009.

See also Dec 18/07 and June 19/08 entries re: delivery order #0006, which was for 1,500 vehicles.

Sept 4/08: A $752 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order for 822 MaxxPro Dash MRAP CAT I vehicles, under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #0009). Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS and is expected to be complete in February 2009.

Pentagon references to “production vehicles with engineering change proposal upgrades for enhanced maneuverability” refer to the MaxxPro Dash, a new variant which is optimized for Afghan operations. The Dash variant is 16” shorter and has an 8″ smaller wheel base, giving it a smaller turning radius of 54 feet. It’s also up to 5,000 pounds lighter, but can accept add-on armoring that will increase its weight. These changes, and the use of Navistar’s MaxxForce D engine, also give it a higher torque to weight ratio for better off-road operations. See also Navistar release.

Navistar already had a strong presence in Afghanistan, as the main truck supplier to the Afghan National Army. Despite earlier Pentagon comments that tagged the BAE OMC/ General Dynamics RG-31 as the favorite for Afghanistan, all vehicles in this MaxxPro order are tagged for Operation Enduring Freedom, and as yet there are no corresponding orders for other MRAPs. DID’s spreadsheet also shows that the 15,771 vehicle program ceiling is now maxed out.

July 4/08: An $84.8 million firm-fixed-priced modification to a delivery order under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #0004) for sustainment items needed to support Category I MRAP vehicles in theater. This order will also be used to support several Engineering Change Proposals to increase the vehicles’ capabilities. Work will be performed in West Point, MS and is expected to be complete in April 2009.

Aug 1/08: A $29.3 million firm-fixed-priced modification to a delivery order under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #0007) for sustainment items needed to support Category I MRAP vehicles in theater. This order will also be used to support several Engineering Change Proposals to increase the vehicles’ capabilities. Work will be performed in West Point, MS and is expected to be complete in April 2009. Deliver order #0007 involved 743 MaxxPros.

Aug 1/08: A $27.4 million firm-fixed-priced modification to a delivery order under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #0002) for sustainment items needed to support Category I MRAP vehicles in theater. This order will also be used to support several Engineering Change Proposals to increase the vehicles’ capabilities. Work will be performed in West Point, MS and is expected to be complete in April 2009.

July 8/08: A $27.7 million firm-fixed price contract for MRAP spare parts. Work will be performed primarily in Springfield, OH and Springfield, MO as well as locations across the USA, and is expected to be complete by Jan 29/10. One bid was solicited on June 26/08 from the manufacturer (W56HZV-08-C-0522). Read Navistar’s “Army Awards Navistar Defense Seven Contracts For Parts And Support:
Contracts Total $125 Million for MRAP Support,” which adds:

“Navistar has shipped more than 185,000 parts pieces to the military for use in Iraq and Afghanistan and has more than 100 field service representatives in theater.”

July 7/08: A $56.9 million firm-fixed price contract for an assortment of automotive parts, including wheels, axles, air conditioners, engines, compressors, generators, and transmissions. Work will be performed primarily in Springfield, OH, with limited production in various cities across the nation, and is expected to be complete by May 4/09. One bid was solicited on April 2/08 (W56HZV-08-C-0494).

July 7/08: A $21.4 million firm-fixed price contract for wheels and pneumatic tires. Work will be performed in Trenton, NJ and is expected to be complete by Jan 30/09. One bid was solicited on June 25/08 (W56HZV-08-C-0520).

June 27/08: A $15.1 million firm fixed price contract for 1,426 air conditioner compressors [NSN 4120-01-555-5459] option priced at $556.11 each; 1,500 condensers for refrigeration [NSN 4130-01-562-3925] option priced at $1,653 each; and air conditioner blowers [NSN 6105-01-562-3922] option priced at $4,378 each. Riding in an enclosed vehicle through 100/40 degree plus heat, while wearing layers of heavy equipment, requires air conditioning as a matter of necessity. At present, 59% of the total condenser and blower options are being exercised, and are considered part of the base award when calculating the contract totals above.

Work will be performed at Dallastown, PA with an expected completion date of Aug 29/08. One bid was solicited with one bid received by the U.S. Army Tank & Automotive Command (TACOM) Life Cycle Management Command in Warren, MI (W56HZV-08-C-0483).

June 27/08: Navistar Defence, LLC in Warrenville, IL received a $6.8 million firm fixed price contract for 2,000 pneumatic tire wheels [NSN 2530-01-555-5456, PN 2596798C91L]; 18 electric engine starters [NSN 2920-01-555-5458, PN 3610516C92[]; and 16 AC generators [NSN 6115-01-555-5460, PN 3819829C91].

Work will be performed in Trenton, NJ, and Belvidere, IL with an expected completion date of Aug 29/08. One bid was solicited with one bid received by the U.S. Army Tank & Automotive Command (TACOM) Life Cycle Management Command (W56HZV-08-C-0500).

June 19/08: International Military and Government LLC in Warrenville, IL is awarded a series of contracts amounting to about $707 million.

The modifications cover both MaxxPro Category I MRAP support and spares, and also “engineering change proposals to increase the vehicles’ capabilities.” Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS under contract M67854-07-D-5032, and are expected to be complete August 2008. The contract modifications include:

• To delivery order #0002 (1,200 for $632.1 M), adds $29.5 million
  
• To delivery order #0004 (754 for $413.9 M), adds $84.8 million
  
• To delivery order #0005 (1,000 for $537.2 M), adds $146.8 million
  
• To delivery order #0006 (1,500 for $1.18 B), adds $211.6 million
  
• To delivery order #0007 (743 for $405.9 M), adds $234.3 million

June 10/08: A $28 million firm-fixed-priced modification to delivery order #0005 under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for the accelerated production of 1,000 MRAP Low Rate Initial Production vehicles.

Delivery order #0005 was for $509.2 million (now $537.2 million), and ordered 1,000 vehicles in October 2007. This is an infusion of funds to speed up production by covering added expenses like overtime et. al., rather than an order for another 1,000 vehicles. Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS and “work is expected to be completed by the end of April 2008.”

May 29/08: The Aug 14/07 entry notes that DynCorp had become Navistar’s in-theater MRAP support network. Now, a DynCorp International release confirms the figures involved:

“Navistar Defense LLC, a division of Navistar International, Inc., awarded DynCorp International (NYSE:DCP) a five year indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity Logistics Support Contract to provide field service support and training for its recently awarded Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicle production contracts. DynCorp International’s Logistics Support Contract has a potential value of up to $500 million over five years with an initial award of $60 million to support deployments to Iraq.”

April 16/08: A $261.3 million for firm-fixed-priced contract modification under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for engineering change proposals to upgrade its MRAP low rate initial production vehicles. The government will procure several engineering changes to provide additional armor protection to increase the survivability of the MRAP Category I (CAT I) vehicles. The order also includes ambulance kits for the vehicles.

Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS and is expected to be complete in November 2008. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was competitively procured. The Marine Corps Systems Command, Quantico, Va., is the contracting activity.

March 14/08: A $405.9 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order (M67854-07-D-5032, #0007) for 743 Category I vehicles. Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS and is expected to be complete November 2008. To date, they have received 5,214 orders under the MRAP program (5,198 CAT-I, 16 CAT-2), 36.9% of the vehicles ordered.

N.B. Amount corrected by DefenseLINK on March 18/08.

Jan 19/08: The NY Times reports that “a gunner was killed and three crew members were wounded” on this day in an IED land mine attack. The soldiers were riding in a MaxxPro MRAP. Read “Hopes for NY Times Reporting Questioned After MRAP Story” for more details.

Jan 10/08: Israeli firm Plasan Sasa announces a $200+ million order to supply Navistar’s International Military and Government, LLC with armoring systems for an additional 1,500 armored MRAP blast-resistant vehicles, to be delivered by the end of July 2008. The Plasan Sasa release says that this armor contract continues and builds on the US military’s June 2007 order for 1,200 MaxxPro vehicles, and notes their investment in US manufacturing facilities.

Dec 18/07: IMG had submitted a variant of its MaxxPro for the MRAP-II competition. It aims to field vehicles that can protect against EFP(Explosively formed Penetrator) land mines, which are more akin to instant tank shells being fired into your vehicle than they are to a conventional explosion. After initial tests, however, only 2 vendors received contracts for additional testing at Aberdeen: BAE Systems (RG-33) and the team of Ideal Innovations, Ceradyne, and Oshkosh (The Bull).

Dec 18/07: A $1.18 billion firm-fixed-priced delivery order under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #0006) to purchase an additional 1,500 MaxxPro CAT-I MRAP Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) vehicles. This order also includes sustainment items needed to support the vehicles in theater, as well as several Engineering Change Proposals to increase the vehicles’ capabilities. Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS and is expected to be complete by the end of July 2008. This contract was competitively procured. Navistar release.

As this accompanying DoD release notes, the Marine Corps issued a number of MRAP orders on this day. Navistar’s IMG remains on top, and even widened its lead slightly. To date, they have received 4,471 orders under the MRAP program (4,455 CAT-I, 16 CAT-2), for 37.6% of 11,862 vehicles ordered.

Dec 7/07: The Rakkasans of the 3rd BCT, 101st Airborne Division in Iraq received 18 MaxxPro CATR-I vehicles. Sgt. Rian Terry, a welder in Co. B, 626th BSB, from Clarksville, TN:

“I like it. It feels safe with all the additional armor. It’s much roomier and easier to access equipment, especially with all your gear on.”

Pfc. Cedric Miller, a grenadier in Co. A, 1-187th Inf., from Blakely, GA, was more direct: “It’s an all-around good truck. We need more.”

American units preparing to receive MRAP vehicles send their maintenance Soldiers attend a 5-day, 40-hour course. During the course, drivers and vehicle commanders participate in both day and night, on- and off-road driving exercises, and obstacle course-like exercises where they maneuver through jersey barriers. Soldiers who complete the 40-hour training are operationally familiar with the equipment. It is up to the unit to make them tactically familiar.

Meanwhile, each battalion is assigned a field support representative and a team of mechanics to continue training the Soldiers. Having civilian representatives and mechanics at the battalion level gives the Soldiers subject-matter experts who are available during maintenance, but will allow the Soldiers to do the hands-on work. US Army

Dec 7/07: A $152 million firm-fixed-priced modification under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for Maxxpro “sustainment items” (spares) under the MRAP program. Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS and is expected to be complete in February 2008.

Nov 28/07: A $24 million firm-fixed-priced modification to delivery order #0004 under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for procure field service representatives to provide support for the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles in theater. Work will be performed in Iraq, and work is expected to be completed November 2008. Note our Aug 14/07 entry – this work will be done by Dyncorp.

Oct 30/07: $68.8 million attached to firm-fixed-priced delivery order #0005 under previously contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for Mine Resistant and Ambush Protected (MRAP) Vehicle sustainment items. The Government shall purchase MRAP University requirements including field service representative-instructors, instructional material, course outlines, and special tooling, and additional sustainment items. Work will be performed at Red River Army Depot in Texarkana, TX, and is expected to be complete by the end of October 2008.

Oct 18/07: $509.2 million for firm-fixed-priced delivery order #0005 under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for 1,000 MaxxPro MRAP CAT I Low Rate Initial Production vehicles. Work will be performed in West Point, MS, and is expected to be complete April 2008. This contract was competitively procured.

Navistar remains in the lead for MRAP orders to date, with 2,971 vehicles (2,955 CAT-I, 16 CAT-II) contracted to date, or 33.8% of the 8,746 MRAP CAT I/II vehicles ordered so far. Force Protection is currently in 2nd place with 30.9%, and BAE/Armor Holdings come in 3rd with 26.3%.

Sept 21/07: International Military and Government LLC in Warrenville, Ill. received $7.2 million firm-fixed-priced modification to delivery order #0002 under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for field service representatives (FSRs) to serve in theater. The FSRs will provide support for MRAP Category I MaxxPro vehicles in Iraq. Work will be performed in Camp Liberty, Iraq, and is expected to be complete in September 2008.

Sept 13/07: International Military and Government LLC in Warrenville, Ill. received a $71.5 million firm-fixed-priced modification to Delivery Order #0002 under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for sustainment items and data requirements for the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles in theater.

The US government is buying 1-Year Forward Deployment Blocks, 1-Year Maintenance Work Blocks, training, training materials, and several contract data requirement lists for International’s MaxxPro MRAP CAT I vehicles. Work will be performed in West Point, Miss., and the deliveries are expected to be complete in October 2007.

Aug 14/07: DynCorp International LLC announces that they have been selected by International Military and Government LLC to provide field-service support and training for its MRAP vehicles. This effectively makes them Navistar’s in-theater support network.

July 20/07: $413.9 million for firm-fixed-priced, delivery order #0004 under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032), covering an additional 755 Category I (CAT I) Mine Resistance Ambush Protected (MRAP) Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) patrol vehicles. Work will be performed in WestPoint, Miss., and is expected to be complete by February 2008. Navistar release.

This contract places Navistar in the lead for MRAP orders to date, with 1,971 vehicles (1,955 CAT-I, 16 CAT-II) contracted to date, or 34.8% of the 5,621 vehicles ordered so far under the 7,774 vehicle MRAP program. Force Protection is currently in 2nd place with 31.7%, and BAE/Armor Holdings come in 3rd with 30.3%

June 18/07: An $8.5 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order #0003 under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for an additional 16 of the larger Category II MRAP JERRV squad vehicles. Note that this works out to about $530,000 per vehicle. Work will be performed in WestPoint, Miss., and work is expected to be complete by February 2008. The DoD release adds, mysteriously, that “Contract funds in the amount of $9,547,248 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year.”

May 31/07: A $623.1 million indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #002) for 1,200 additional Category I (CAT I) Mine Resistance Ambush Protected (MRAP) Low Rate Initial Production vehicles. Work on the MaxxPro MPV contract will be performed in West Point, MS, and is expected to be complete by February 2008. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year.

Which leads us to the next question… will existing MRAP vehicles be enough? They may not, and ironically, International may have declined to submit an offering of its own that could have survived in the new environment.

Footnotes

fn1. A shaped charge ‘squishes’ and detonates when it hits, focusing the blast into a cone with a point that’s like a plasma torch – with a wallop behind it. The immense focused energy converges right on the armor, cutting through the steel and/or blowing chunks off the back in a spray of molten metal of fragments, killing the occupants and/or damaging machinery.

Cage armor can prevent some types of warheads from detonating, especially those with a piezo-electric ‘crush’ fuze. Those of you thinking that metal screens are not 100% certain to prevent warhead detonation, depending on the angle at which the piezo-electric crush fuze hit, and other warhead characteristics, are correct. In general, one can expect cage armor of any sort to turn only about 50-60% of rounds into duds.

The other option “cage armor” provides is to start that process away from the armor, so the shaped charge cone’s focal point is moved out in front of the armor it’s designed to penetrate. Instead of a precisely focused cutting/blasting point, you get an less focused blast. Depending on how big the warhead is, how far away the detonation is, and how strong the vehicle’s armor protection is, its occupants may or may not be saved.

Additional Readings & Sources

• Thanks to Navistar for working with DID to help verify vehicle totals.
• Navistar – MaxxPro Dash DXM.
• DID (Dec 16/13) – High Afghan Exit Costs Force US Military to Contemplate End of Era. Which includes getting rid of many MRAPs.
• DID (Oct 23/13) – Choices, Changes & Opportunities: Corporate Lessons from the Afghan R4D Exit. Understanding the difficulty helps to explain some aspects of subsequent decisions about the MRAP fleet.
• US Army (May 5/11) – ‘Golden hour’ initiative pays off in Afghanistan. Aeromedical units play a big role – but so does having nearby vehicles that can travel in dangerous areas, and carry initial medical facilities with them.
• Plasan Sasa (June 3/07) – Plasan Sasa Will Supply International Military and Government, LLC with Critical MRAP Vehicle Protection for the US Marines [PDF format]
• Navistar (May 31/07) – U.S. Marine Corps Awards $623 Million Contract for Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) Vehicles to International Military and Government, LLC
• Reuters (June 21/07) – U.S. Gen.: Iranian Weapons Still Flowing into Iraq. Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch: “What I try to do is stick to the facts. And I know that inside of my battle space, there are munitions clearly marked with Iranian markings, and I am losing many of my soldiers to EFPs… It is clear that the EFP technology and munitions is coming from Iran. We have to stop that.”
• USA Today (May 31/07) – MRAPs can’t stop newest weapon
• DID (Oct 6/06) – Dispatches from Afghanistan: Armored vs. Blast Resistant
• DID (July 21/06) – GD-RAFAEL’s Reactive Armor Equips US Military (updated)

Appendix A: The MRAP Story, and the MaxxPro Story

In 2005, military manufacturers began to plan for the end of the US military’s Hummer orders, and the associated battle to replace it with a new vehicle. By this time, land mines had already been the #1 killer in Iraq for some time, and a few manufacturers were also looking to break into the American market with solutions to this problem. The technology was not new; indeed, it had been in use for over 40 years. The US military had just been very slow to adopt it, aside from some limited orders the 101st Airborne had placed for South African RG-31 vehicles, limited purchases of Force Protection’s Cougar and Buffalo vehicles for Explosive Ordnance Disposal teams, and M1117 Guardian ASV armored cars for US military police units. Worse, the ASVs were produced in New Orleans. Hurricane Katrina interrupted production just as it was ramping up.

By 2006, 3 years into the war in Iraq, realization began to dawn that the Hummers and their blast-catching flat bottoms needed a supplement in theater now, rather than waiting for the Humvee’s successor. The US Army and Marines began taking a closer look at mine-resistant vehicles on the market, and key manufacturers began maneuvering for position.

The new Mine Resistant, Ambush Protected (MRAP) program would include a smaller Category I MRUV patrol vehicles that seated at least 6 people in total, including the driver and front seat. Category II JERRV vehicles would seat at least 10, and would be large enough to hold bomb-disposal robots and other useful gear.

The expected MRAP requirement quickly began to mushroom in size, as IED land mine attacks intensified on the front lines. A large July 2007 order came hot on the heels of US Secretary of Defense Gates’ request to Congress for an extra $1.2 billion in FY 2007 to fund an additional 2,650 MRAP vehicles, on the grounds that manufacturers were ramping up production more quickly than original forecasts. Meanwhile, key inputs such as steel and tires which might have become production bottlenecks were expedited under a DX rating that give the MRAP program priority over almost all other military programs. Sen. and VP-elect Biden [D-DE], who often heard responses re: lack of industrial capacity when he began asking why more MRAP vehicles weren’t in theater, found that his “put the money together, issue the contracts, and let’s find out” speech [MS Word], embodied in Amendment #739 to the FY 2007 military budget, became the US military’s go-forward plan.

By the time the competition began Force Protection, whose v-hulled Cougar vehicles had catalyzed this realization with their performance in Iraq, was set with their Cougars for MRAP CAT I/II.

General Dynamics was already partnered with BAE OMC of South Africa and the Canadian government to offer the RG-31, which was already in service with airborne and SOCOM customers. Then they signed another deal with Force Protection to share production of Cougar vehicles.

BAE Systems was busy developing their RG-33 family, an update of their proven RG-31s that incorporated new technologies and lessons learned. Meanwhile, Armor Holdings, who supplied the US military’s FMTV medium trucks and up-armoring for its Hummers, worked on an up-armored design based on the FMTV. They would eventually be acquired by BAE in a multi-billion dollar deal, after establishing an MRAP order foothold for their “Caiman” vehicles.

Lacking ready designs or American plants, others chose partnerships as their path to market. Navistar’s truck-building competitor Oshkosh entered the fray with a pair of Partnerships, signing a deal with PVI for their new Alpha MRUV vehicle, and Thales Australia for the larger Bushmaster vehicle that was already serving with Australian forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Protected Vehicles, Inc. (PVI) also submitted the Golan, designed in partnership with RAFAEL and the Israeli military.

German firm KMW’s Dingo had also demonstrated front-line performance with German forces in Afghanistan, but their American partner Textron elected to offer their own M1117 instead, eliminating KMW before the competition had even started.

That left Navistar considering what to do.

Navistar subsidiary International Military and Government LLC (IMG, now Navistar Defense) didn’t have expertise in armored vehicles, but they did know trucks. The firm is used to substantial production numbers, and has a field maintenance network on the front lines. In addition to to being one of North America’s largest producers of civilian commercial trucks and mid-range diesel engines (161,000 vehicles in 2006), it is producing and supporting 2,781 vehicles for the Afghan National Army, and claims 9 additional contracts with the U.S. government for more than 1,000 units each. These contracts encompass include service trucks and buses that have been used in the Iraq reconstruction effort. Production facilities include Garland, TX; Springfield, OH; West Point, MS; Melrose Park, IL (diesel engines); and Tulsa, OK (buses).

The key for Navistar would be finding the right partner, with the aim of developing an armored MRAP-candidate vehicle based around IMG’s WorkStar 7000 truck chassis. In 2005, the firm contracted with South Africa’s Armour Technology Systems (ATS), which has design rights to several mine-resistant vehicles used in South Africa, and had also developed blast-resistant SAMIL armored cab solutions for South Africa’s trucks.

During the course of that relationship with ATS, Navistar also opened relations with the Israeli firm Plasan Sasa, who had been designing and manufacturing up-armoring kits for the Marine Corps’ MTVR trucks for several years. That gave them a solid relationship with the MRAP competition’s key client. The Kibbutz Sasa firm also had experience developing full vehicles; its own light protected vehicle called the Caracal was under review by the US Marines for a different role. Navistar decided that they had found their partner – and in January 2007, they summarily canceled their agreement with South Africa’s ATS.

The question of what ATS knowledge may have been transferred or used by Navistar remains in the hands of lawyers, and also a PR campaign by ATS that publicizes its specific allegations of bad faith and unethical dealings.

The key characteristics of Navistar’s final vehicle contender are clearer. Unlike the HMMWV‘s auto-derived frame, IMG’s heavy-duty truck chassis would have the load capacity required to handle the weight of additional armor etc., without wearing out early. The final design positions a v-shaped crew compartment on top of that truck chassis, allowing maximum production commonality while using the compartment’s armoring and shape to channel blasts around the crew area. Extensive use of components from IMG’s trucks, including predictive maintenance features, would ensure that their entry was both producible in large numbers and maintainable in the field.

In return for this positioning, Navistar’s IMG received a test vehicle production contract for their vehicle – and nothing more. IMG/Plasan Sasa’s MPV was not featured among the early-stage orders [1st set | 2nd set] from the US military for low-risk designs, which went to rivals Force Protection (Cougar), BAE (RG-33, RG-33L), General Dynamics (RG-31), Oshkosh/PVI (Alpha CAT I), and PVI (Golan CAT II).

Yet Navistar went on to become the winner in the initial MRAP competition, with the highest share of any competitor. So why was Navistar initially shut out?

One logical conclusion is doubts about its performance. The biggest downside to capsule-mounting a blast-resistant hull on top of a frame is the danger that a mine blast will separate the capsule from the frame, or (more likely) destroy the chassis and immobilize the vehicle in an ambush zone. Moving a v-shaped blast pan beneath the chassis reduces that danger, but that solution creates issues with ground clearance; and – since it offers less of a gap from the blast – with crew survivability.

What changed? Two things.

One was the Biden Amendment in the Senate, which accelerated funding for MRAPs, even as the desired number of vehicles for the FY 2007-2008 program rose again from 4,100 to 7,774 vehicles. At that volume, existing vehicle manufacturers would be very hard-pressed to deliver the required quantity in time. Which in turn lent a higher value to producibility, as long as the vehicles offered substantially better protection than a Humvee. Especially with the US Army reportedly looking for 17,000 blast-resistant vehicles of its own by 2010 – a number that would be borne out, and more, by subsequent events.

The second thing that happened was the testing at Aberdeen Proving Ground, which appears to have quieted doubts concerning IMG/Plasan Sasa’s design. Navistar received just the 2nd post-testing order to emerge from Marine Corps Systems Command, behind Force Protection’s early 1,000 vehicle order in April 2007. A May 31, 2007 report from Defense News claims that Navistar officials heard about their win from the offices of minority leader Sen. Trent Lott [R-MS] and Rep. Roger Wicker [R-MS], and Navistar spokesman Roy Wiley added at the time that “We did extremely well during the tests [at Aberdeen], and we are extremely pleased.”

Plasan Sasa does make composite armors for vehicles, and whatever it used apparently survived the trials at Aberdeen. Navistar would go on to produce its MaxxPro for MRAP orders, as well as the MaxxPro Air Force, the MaxxPro Plus with improved protection, a MaxxPro ambulance (production orders were for the Dash variant), the MaxxPro MEAP, the MaxxPro Dash for Afghan operations, and the MaxxPro Recovery Vehicle (MRV) for towing other vehicles out of danger zones.

In contrast, Navistar’s trucking competitor Oshkosh failed with both of its purpose-designed vehicles. The firm received 100 advance low-risk orders for the Alpha vehicle, which then failed testing and was removed from the competition. Despite its successful service on the front lines, the v-hulled Australian Bushmaster design never saw a single production order during the MRAP program. It would join Textron’s M1117 on the sidelines, until Oshkosh’s big win in the subsequent MRAP All Terrain Vehicle (M-ATV) competition.

Appendix B: MPV or APC to Face EFPs? (June 2007)

A May 31/07 USA Today article titled “MRAPs can’t stop newest weapon” explains the dilemma:

“The military plans to spend as much as $25 billion for up to 22,000 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles by 2009. Last month, Defense Secretary Robert Gates declared that buying the new vehicles should be the Pentagon’s top procurement priority.

But the armor on those vehicles cannot stop the newest bomb to emerge, known as an explosively formed penetrator (EFP).”

An EFP is just another type of land mine, where the explosives are arranged to shape a metal disk into a kind of instant high-caliber tank round as they detonate, launching it at nearby objects. This is not a new approach; the USA’s Sensor-Fuzed Weapon, a.k.a. “cans of whup-ass,” uses this exact approach but is dropped from an airplane so it can attack through the top, where armor is usually weakest. An EFP’s mode of operation when used as a land mine is a ballistic side attack rather than a conventional land mine’s explosion, which means a v-hull won’t necessarily offer much protection.

These weapons have also been among the land mines causing problems for heavier Stryker/LAV-III wheeled armored personnel carriers in Diyala Province. The Strykers lack the level of underbelly protection found in MRAP vehicles, and their “steel cage” armor designed to defeat [1] the shaped-charge warheads on anti-tank rockets will not stop large-caliber shells – or a reasonable imitation created by an EFP land-mine.

Iran has been heavily involved in shipping these weapons into Iraq for some time now, and training both Shi’ites and Sunnis to make them. A January 13, 2007 document from the USMC says that as the USA fields vehicles with MRAP-class protection against buried mines, Iraqi insurgents’ use of EFPs “can be expected to increase significantly.”

While the US has been testing new armor compositions designed to break up EFP slugs, there is a commonly-available solution on the market. It’s called “reactive armor,” and already equips American Bradley fighting vehicles, M1 tanks, and other armored platforms.

In a sense, it’s the reverse of the EFP concept – instead of using an explosion to create a killing weapon, it reacts with an outward explosion when hit. This either blows the rocket/ tank round/ or EFP projectile completely off-course, or tips it into an easily-absorbed ‘slap hit’ rather than the precise, focused strike required to penetrate steel.

The armor is manufactured in a cooperative venture between Israel’s RAFAEL and General Dynamics, and already has a strong production base. The only counter to it would be a anti-tank missiles that use a dual-warhead charge, like Russia’s AT-13 Metis or AT-14 Kornet. Some of these weapons even have remote-firing capability. That kind of equipment can only come from a state sponsor, however – a fact that sharply ups the ante on its use as a definitive act of war in theaters like Iraq or Afghanistan.

There is already an MRAP contender designed from the outset to use this kind of armor to its maximum effectiveness. Protected Vehicles Inc. MRAP CAT II Golan vehicle was designed in conjunction with RAFAEL and the Israeli MoD’s Merkava tank project office. Unsurprisingly, it was also designed from the outset to carry reactive armor as an option, without changing its outward appearance. The result of this design feature is that the enemy can’t tell if reactive armor is present or not, and must therefore assume “yes” for all vehicles of its type.

The US military ordered 60 Golan vehicles for immediate deployment to the front lines back in March 2007, in addition to its order for test vehicles.

The interesting thing is, IMG had its own vehicle designed from the outset to use reactive armor. The “International APC” was a definite CAT II sized vehicle at 30,000 pounds curb weight. Based on an International MV-7000 heavy truck cab, the APC promised a vehicle equipped with explosive reactive armor from the get-go.

For whatever reason, IMG chose not to enter this vehicle in the MRAP competition. Their APC could never have won a CAT I MRUV order, of course, as the MaxxPro just did. What it might have offered is an additional purchase option for the US military, when EFP land mines begin taking their toll on MRAP vehicles fielded in theater.

Postscript: DID predicted that a number of MRAP vehicle manufacturers were about to start showing much more interest in reactive armor solutions for their vehicles. It’s always more difficult to integrate later, of course, rather than as a design-in option. Still, it was immediately available – and better than nothing. That prediction proved false, as the Army began development of anti-EFP metal armor/add-on kits instead.